REMOTELY PILOTED AIRSHIP FOR ATMOSPHERIC TRACER

 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, NATIONAL ENERGY TECHNOLOGY LABORATORY       SAMPLING PROGRAM (RPATS)

Background

The Clear Air Coalition, comprising California businesses, industries, agriculture and government agencies, is working to bring California air quality into EPA compliance. The Coalition’s

research, covering a wide area of California, concentrates on sampling and modeling air quality in California’s Central Valley. Coalition research projects, funded for nearly $45 million to improve the understanding of air pollution in the region, have improved conditions somewhat: Between 1988 and 1998, the number of days the southern portions of the Central Valley exceeded federal ozone standards fell by 47 percent, and the number of days that particulates exceeded standards fell by 90 percent.

One of the problems confronting the researchers was the collection of air quality data duringadverse weather conditions, such as the Tulle Fog, a low, dense, stagnant and very moist layer of air that blankets the Central Valley during the winter months. Inert gaseous tracer materials sensed by aircraft-mounted instruments have been used for nearly 30 years by Tracer ES&T to study air pollution sources and distribution, but normal aircraft collection of these emissions is impossible at low-altitude and in fog. Deployment of a dense network of moored balloons with adsorption tube samplers attached to tether lines would have been costly and lacked the flexibility to adapt to changing weather conditions. A method of remotely collecting data at low levels during the Tulle

Fog conditions was needed so aircraft pilots would not be at risk in the adverse weather. pilot and eventual incorporation of all permit applications were estimated to be $3.1 million.

Project Description

Tracer ES&T, with assistance and funding from the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Western States Petroleum Associates, analyzed the needs and provided a solution – a remotely-piloted blimp with advance air monitoring instruments capable of sampling and measuring vertical plume measurements in dense fog conditions at elevations less than 1,000 feet and transmitting the data to ground-based computers. The Remotely Piloted Airship for Atmospheric Tracer Sampling (RPATS) combines a commercially available radio-controlled airship, a Global Positioning System (GPS) and real-time data analysis that measures plume concentrations as a function of downwind distance, horizontal location and height above ground.

RPATS is a 30 by 7.5-foot helium-filled blimp capable of lifting a payload of up to 10 pounds. The airship, guided by radio control from the ground, is capable of cruising for over an hour at speeds of 15 to 20 mph or for shorter periods up to 30 mph. The seven-pound payload with its battery-powered gas-sampling equipment is mounted in a gondola on the under side. The system is highly portable. The deflated airship is transported by truck and can be inflated and ready to fly in less than one hour by a ground crew of three. The navigation and computer instrumentation for sampling is in a second truck. Tracer ES&T has two certified pilots trained to locate an emissions plume, fly the airship cross-wind through the plume at various altitudes and distances downwind, collect data and transmit it back to the ground. (The California Air Resources Board also maintains six fixed-wing aircraft and monitoring and meteorological instruments at 185 stations throughout the state to provide data to improve air quality.)

The maiden voyage of the airship was made on December 5, 2000 in connection with a planned release from a steam generator at Belridge oil field in the San Joaquin Valley near Bakersfield. Aera Energy injected a tracer into the steam prior to release to allow analysis of where and how the steam plume is distributed in the atmosphere. The oil field selected offers easy access for the airship and ground-based controls, and is representative of the types of locations that can be monitored using the airship sampling technology. The winter sampling phase extended for about a month .

Project Benefits and Impacts

Development of the RPATS Clean Airship is an excellent example of cooperative efforts by private industry and federal and state government agencies to improve air quality. The airship was designed and tested in California's Central Valley to demonstrate

the effectiveness of remotely collecting and sampling air quality data at low altitude in foggy and overcast weather conditions. The design met rigid specifications for global positioning navigation, maximum sampling capabilities, computer relays, and minimum weight instrumentation to be carried in the small platform beneath the 30-foot blimp. Initial sampling flights have successfully provided data on air currents and air quality in the Bakersfield, CA area.

Because of its uniquely designed capabilities, RPATS will enable the acquisition of real-time in-flight data below 2,000 feet in low-visibility weather, critical air quality data otherwise unavailable because of safety considerations. The airship also offers economy of operation compared to the cost of such alternative systems as networks of sensor-bearing anchored balloons or, in certain respects, fixed-wing aircraft, which obviously fly higher, faster and cover broader areas than RPATS.

The California Air Resources Board estimates that standard aircraft surveys, which deliver only minimal onsite processed data, run about four to six hours flight time per day at a cost of $15,000 to $20,000. For full air quality data reduction and reporting from low altitudes in foggy or overcast weather, Tracer ES&T Inc. is confident they can run four to five RPATS flights daily at a cost of about $6,000 to $8,000. For its designed task, RPATS is an efficient, safe and economical aircraft that fills a vital gap in atmospheric data gathering for air quality surveys.

 

SAMPLING PROGRAM (RPATS)  CONTACTS

REMOTELY PILOTED AIRSHIP FOR ATMOSPHERIC TRACER

Thomas J. Rappolt

Tracer ES&T, Inc.

San Marcos, CA

Phone: (760) 744-9611

FAX: (760) 744-8616

Nancy C. Comstock

U.S. Department of Energy

National Energy Technology

Laboratory (NETL)

National Petroleum Technology

Office (NPTO)

Tulsa, OK

Phone: (918) 699-2059

FAX: (918) 295-6576

E-mail: ncomstoc@npto.doe.gov

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Army’s LEMV Soars Over Historic Airship Site in First Flight

12 AUGUST 2012

Have any of our readers wondered whatever happened to the long-awaited Army's LEMV (Long  Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle) ? Well, first, we have to recall that in the Army, anything that moves is called a "vehicle" ---- even what most other knowledgeable observers would call an airship .

Emerging from the hangars and storage facilities of the Joint Base Fort Dix / McGuire Air Force Base/Lakehurst Naval Air Station was the LEMV , a 300+ foot long  airship built by Northrop-Grumman.  Its design mission is Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) ; its original design specifies flight without a crew (Remotely Operated Vehicle --- ROV) , but for this sortie it took to the air for an hour-and-a-half  with a crew to perform a launch-and-recovery and test the operation of its flight control system .

At 300+ feet in length, the airship must have been eerily reminiscent of another tragically iconic airship that was attempting to land at the same Lakehurst airrfield 75 years ago. We'll let you do the math and deduce which Lighter-Than-Air craft we're talking about. Like medieval alchemists avoiding a curse by refusing to speak the forbidden word aloud, we will eschew uttering the fateful name.   

This was the successful culmination of a project that cost on the order of $500,000,000 dollars (we believe that the original contract specification was for "up to three airships") and took years to develop.  To the surprise of this writer and quondam Captain, U.S. Air Force, this airship was built for the U.S. Army . It will undergo at least a month of testing and is the first successful result , in an Olympics event of its own, of the critical need for ISR surveillance of future war zones as well as a host of non-military missions.

eMail HYBRIDPELTA@HOTMAIL.COM for a free copy of the semi-famous 31 Applications for Airships . The first ten (10) requests get a copy of our (genuine U.S. Postal Service) custom-made postage stamp, lightly cancelled, on the envelope containing your 31 Apps . The stamp image is of Roald Amundsen's airship Norge crossing the Arctic ice. 

This is important news, and good news after a series of attempts, because the Pentagon has not previously succeeded in this effort for years, and it's ironic that it was the Army, rather than the Navy (previous Gold Medal winner with its anti-submarine blimps of the Second World War) or the Air Force, whose hegemony of the air is now challenged, possibly as the result of LTA craft being scorned for so long by the USAF as the result of Fighter-Pilot Syndrome --- "If it's not supersonic, we're not interested" .

The LEMV airship is scheduled to head to a war zone next year, at the earliest.  An Army spokesman issued the following statement, "Additional first flight objectives include airworthiness testing and demonstration, and system level performance verification . All objectives were met during the first flight” .

If the LEMV successfully concludes its tests, it may deploy to Afghanistan for combat trials in early 2013, ironically just as the rest of our military forces appear to be returning from that theater of operations .  Its mission there will undoubtedly include persistent surveillance --- as much as weeks on end --- monitoring insurgent troop operations. We understand, to our delight, that it may wind up pulling double duty as a cargo carrier ; it is specified to lift seven tons of cargo and carry it for 2,400 miles at 30 miles per hour . thereby justifying its role in civilian life after its Honorable Discharge. Clearly, there are many jobs in that career choice waiting for it .

Seven tons of cargo ? Will someone please page Dr. Prentice, of ISO Polar and the University of Manitoba, famous for the "Airships to the Arctic" Cnference series ? He has been championing this development of sensible airship transportation along those lines for years. As the unprecedented warming of the entire continent is melting the ice roads upon which depend supply chain logistics TO the north and critical carriage of strategic minerals FROM the north, a suitable replacement is sorely needed.  

    Long-Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle                    Illustration: Northrop Grumman

We steadfastly refuse to call it a blimp. Its design appears to us to be a hybrid, ADDING  lift derived from its aerodynamic shape in which the shape of the entire envelope of the craft acts as an airfoil TO lift derived from the natural lifting power of its lighter-than-air internal gases .

Its ingenious combination of  remote controls, satellite-based information,  and high-technology sensors, appears to be a fairly effective, but complex, mix.

 The airship’s inaugural sortie had been pushed back several times;  combining a giant airship with satellite-based remote controls and the latest high-tech sensors is more difficult than Northrop thought it would be.  As happens with any new integration of complex technologies, the Army had to  extend its initial schedule of test and approval several times. The first flight was scheduled for June, but in both military and major civilian projects a two month delay is not unreasonable. Northrup

Lockheed Martin, a Northrop-Grumman competitor, was working to receive a multi-billion-dollar contract to develop a cargo airship, dubbed the Walrus. At the last minute, the Pentagon zeroed out funding.

Lockheed Martin, never one to give up easily, continued to develop its Walrus airship designs using its own financial resources and finally sold its first modern LTA airship design to a Canadian cargo company for an unspecified sum.

We have no details of that transaction, and we understand that the Army does not engage in entrepreneurial enterprises, BUT we believe that it would have been a good plan to heed the dictum condensed from a paragraph in an Airships to the Arctic Conference  : "Don't sell 'em, lease 'em?" .

We wish both Northrop-Grumman AND Lockheed Martin notable success on these landmark projects. Our country can't lose !

Errors and Omissions Excepted

               

 

Lighter-than-air craft gaining favor in Mideast

Dubai Air Show » November 12, 2007

by  David Donald

November 12, 2007, 4:44 AM

Using gas for lift is hardly new, but interest in the idea is making something of a resurgence here in the Middle East.

The public’s perception of the usefulness of lighter-than-air (LTA) flight largely ended in flames with the 1937 crash of the Hindenburg, but the advantages of LTA are many and have increasing application to today’s surveillance requirements. Inert helium now gets used rather than hydrogen, and while it’s heavier, helium still offers excellent lifting properties–roughly equivalent to 1 kilogram for every cubic meter of gas.

LTA platforms fall into two categories: airships–manned or unmanned–and tethered aerostats. Both offer outstanding long-endurance surveillance capabilities with heavy and large payloads, at low cost. Aerostats operate at up to 15,000 feet, with an effective coverage of 245,000 square kilometers at a radius of 280 kilometers. Most feature an “intelligent” tether that incorporates power supply for the mission system, two-way fiber-optic datalink for sensor data and control, and lightning protection.

Aerostats have fins to keep them directionally stable in the wind. The vehicle keeps its shape thanks to a ballonet, an internal bag that gets filled with air on the ground. As the aerostat (or airship) rises, the helium expands, countered by air expelled from the ballonet. As it descends during recovery, air gets pumped into the ballonet to offset the shrinking helium volume. It takes around 40 minutes to winch down an aerostat from 15,000 feet.

Contrary to popular opinion, LTA vehicles are highly survivable, mainly thanks to the low pressure differential that allows them to sustain numerous tears in the bag. The bag itself is transparent to radar, so that the radar cross-section is very low–the principal source of RCS being either the mission equipment or the tether in the case of an aerostat. The radar transparency of the bag allows large radar antennas to be carried inside rather than as external loads.

LTA in the region
Worldwide use of LTAs for military surveillance continues to grow, especially here in the Gulf region. The United Arab Emirates has 71-meter and 17-meter aerostats, plus a rapidly deployable aerostat for security operations. Kuwait also has a 71-meter aerostat. Both Saudi Arabia and Iraq are also looking at aerostats for border security surveillance, and it is known that further aerostats will be deployed in the region next year, although the nation(s) has not been identified.

Based on the successful use of the Lockheed Martin Tethered Aerostat Radar System (TARS) along its own southern border, the U.S. has deployed several LTA systems for use in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Employing a 17-meter aerostat and carrying air surveillance and fire control radars, the Raytheon Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System–better known as JLENS–provides an air surveillance function, especially against low-flying cruise missiles. A JLENS was deployed to Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom, but was subsequently relocated to Iraq. The JLENS system is thought to be migrating to an unmanned airship platform for Iraq operations.

Lockheed Martin’s Persistent Threat Detection System (PTDS) became operational in Iraq in October 2004 and uses a 32-meter platform carrying an L3 Wescam EO/IR turret and other sensors, integrated into a ground defense system. It provides a quick-response “eyes on target” capability. Further PTDS systems were deployed to the theater in 2006.

A bright future for LTA
According to Gregory Gottlieb, a lighter-than-air consultant speaking at AUVSI’s Unmanned Systems Middle East conference on Saturday, the future of the LTA platform is bright. In the U.S. the stratospheric airship presents a promising avenue for persistent surveillance and as an alternative to satellites for some tasks. The attractions compared with satellites are many, the most obvious being low cost, and the ability to recover the mission payload for replacement or repair. Another emerging technology is the hybrid airship that combines gas lift with aerodynamic lift to allow for much larger payloads. Different roles for LTA platforms are being actively pursued, including the civilian applications and the weaponizing of airships for military missions.

LTA Critics --- NONE ARE SO BLIND AS THEY WHO REFUSE TO SEE

The reason for this reprint of a news story : To refute the postings of simple-minded souls who don't bother to read the background information about     new-old technologies before writing nonsense about them in the Comments Sections of Internet Forums ...

... you know, the ones who continue to write that LTA airships are too slow; fly at dangerously low altitudes; require a huge ground-handling crew; sit on top of dangerous hydrogen ready to burst into flame at the first hint of static electricity; are subject to dangerous small arms fire; and so on...

... often supplemented by material from ex-fighter pilots who think nothing of strapping themselves into a small aluminum tube (so easily visible on a radar screen, their propulsion system emitting a trail of heat so temptingly easy to follow by heat-seeking missiles) and traveling at outrageously high altitudes, the pilot, dependent on portable sources of oxygen, who thinks nothing of flying at speeds so fast that instant and total disintegration awaits his slightest misstep....

... or, worse, the illiterates who have never taken the trouble to read the first sentence of authoritative information about LTA flight after they play a video of the Hindenburg disaster over and over, but have the temerity to criticize the entire technology.... rather like viewing a Formula One race-car accident and hurling insults at automobiles ever after. 

Here's a press release about the Dubai (one of the incredibly successful, wealthy United Arab Emirates) Air Show, emended in red by HYBRIDPELTA, your BLOG Editor :

Lighter-than-air craft (LTA) gaining favor in Mideast

Dubai Air Show » November 12, 2007

by  David Donald

November 12, 2007, 4:44 AM

Using gas for lift is hardly new, but interest in the idea is making something of a resurgence here in the Middle East.

The public’s perception of the usefulness of lighter-than-air (LTA) flight largely ended in flames with the 1937 crash of the Hindenburg, [perceptions of a public fed by sensational news stories in the popular media, playing the same clip over and over, completely ignoring the outstanding, incredibly successful, accomplishments of the Navy LTA blimps in anti-submarine warfare during the entire Second World War OR their minor --- by comparison --- utility in commercially marketing products like Goodyear tires and sports events ] but the advantages of LTA are many and have increasing application to today’s surveillance requirements. Inert helium now gets used rather than hydrogen, and while it’s heavier, helium still offers excellent lifting properties–roughly equivalent to 1 kilogram for every cubic meter of gas. [?? by using expensive Helium, instead of using Hydrogen, one of the most common substances on earth, the most prevalent element in the universe, easily obtainable by hydrolysis from water using Concentrated Solar Power (CSP),  ??] .

LTA platforms fall into two categories: airships–manned or unmanned–and tethered aerostats. Both offer outstanding long-endurance surveillance capabilities with heavy and large payloads, at low cost. Aerostats operate at up to 15,000 feet, with an effective coverage of 245,000 square kilometers at a radius of 280 kilometers. Most feature an “intelligent” tether that incorporates power supply for the mission system, two-way fiber-optic datalink for sensor data and control, and lightning protection.
Aerostats have fins to keep them directionally stable in the wind. The vehicle keeps its shape thanks to a ballonet, an internal bag that gets filled with air on the ground. As the aerostat (or airship) rises, the helium expands, countered by air expelled from the ballonet. As it descends during recovery, air gets pumped into the ballonet to offset the shrinking helium volume. It takes around 40 minutes to winch down an aerostat from 15,000 feet.

Contrary to popular opinion, LTA vehicles are highly survivable [here we think he means "relatively invulnerable"] , mainly thanks to the low pressure differential that allows them to sustain numerous tears in the bag. The bag itself is transparent to radar, so that the radar cross-section is very low–the principal source of RCS being either the mission equipment or the tether in the case of an aerostat. The radar transparency of the bag allows large radar antennas to be carried inside rather than as external loads.

LTA in the region

Worldwide use of LTAs for military surveillance continues to grow, especially here in the Gulf region. The United Arab Emirates has 71-meter and 17-meter aerostats, plus a rapidly deployable aerostat for security operations. Kuwait also has a 71-meter aerostat. Both Saudi Arabia and Iraq are also looking at aerostats for border security surveillance, and it is known that further aerostats will be deployed in the region next year, although the nation(s) has not been identified.

Based on the successful use of the Lockheed Martin Tethered Aerostat Radar System (TARS) along its own southern border, the U.S. has deployed several LTA systems for use in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Employing a 17-meter aerostat and carrying air surveillance and fire control radars, the Raytheon Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System–better known as JLENS–provides an air surveillance function, especially against low-flying cruise missiles. A JLENS was deployed to Afghanistan during Operation Enduring Freedom, but was subsequently relocated to Iraq. The JLENS system is thought to be migrating to an unmanned airship platform for Iraq operations.
Lockheed Martin’s Persistent Threat Detection System (PTDS) became operational in Iraq in October 2004 and uses a 32-meter platform carrying an L3 Wescam EO/IR turret and other sensors, integrated into a ground defense system. It provides a quick-response “eyes on target” capability. Further PTDS systems were deployed to the theater in 2006.

A bright future for LTA

According to Gregory Gottlieb, a lighter-than-air consultant speaking at AUVSI’s [the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, the premier professional organization for robotic aircraft technology in the world] Unmanned Systems Middle East conference on Saturday, the future of the LTA platform is bright. In the U.S. the stratospheric airship presents a promising avenue for persistent surveillance and as an alternative to satellites for some tasks. The attractions compared with satellites are many, the most obvious being low cost, and the ability to recover the mission payload for replacement or repair. Another emerging technology is the hybrid airship that combines gas lift with aerodynamic lift to allow for much larger payloads. Different roles for LTA platforms are being actively pursued, including the civilian applications and the weaponizing of airships for military missions.

[primary paper, in black type-face, a well-written cogent and compelling press release authored by David Donald, a knowledgeable professional present at the 2007 Dubai Air Show, in the Middle East]

Second Annual AIRSHIPS FOR NORTHERN OPERATIONS Workshop

    Second Annual AIRSHIPS FOR NORTHERN OPERATIONS Workshop

                   University of Anchorage, Fairbanks, Alaska                                                   The Alaska University Transportation Center  

WITH       The NASA Ames Research Center   AND    ISO Polar  

Normally, it doesn't make sense to just cut-and-paste material directly from the web. Two exceptions to that Governing Rule apply here:

1. This is from NASA's web site so that the usual copyright laws do not apply (Federal government material is not copyright) AND

2. We felt that it was important to spread the word about this initiative of the Federal government to encourage sensible use of Lighter-Than-Air craft, not subject to the often sophomoric whining of Forum responders :       ["It can be brought down by a pistol shot", "needs a one-hundred-member ground crew to bring it safely to the ground", "It will explode as soon as it accumulates some static electricity", etc.]

Here it is, copied directly from the NASA web site --- they need as much publicity for this excellent program as we can provide. Please note that it is also supported by ISO Polar --- the admirable extension of the "Airships to the Arctic" program.

The first Cargo Airships for Northern Operations Workshop in 2011 met with great success as a venue that brought together potential users of modern heavy lift airship services with representatives from the aerospace community that are developing modern cargo airships. The second workshop will follow up the achievements of the first one by further facilitating the formation of near-term business opportunities for the manufacturers and users of heavy lift airships with representatives from the aerospace community that are developing modern cargo airships.

The second workshop will follow up the achievements of the first one by further facilitating the formation of near-term business opportunities for the manufacturers and users of heavy lift airships.

Researchers from NASA Ames Research Center will provide insights into the new technologies that form the solid engineering basis for modern cargo airship systems. Speakers from the mining, oil, and gas industries will describe their transportation challenges and how they plan to exploit cargo airships in support of their businesses. Local Alaskan air freight firms will discuss how cargo airships can complement existing air transport fleets by providing additional capability and expanding air shipping services. The world’s leading developers of airships will provide design and operational details on the new cargo airships they’re currently developing and preparing to deploy for commercial service. Representatives from the financial community will present the many options available for what has often been the missing element of airship development and operations, funding.

Workshop Themes
The second cargo airship workshop will focus on fostering the business of cargo airship operations by demonstrating that the cargo airship is now at the threshold of deployment. Workshop attendees will learn how cargo airships can be utilized generally, and deployed specifically for their business operations. The overall workshop message will be that the time has come for the cargo airship to get down to business.

Workshop Format
The first two days of the workshop are intended to be a time for the exchange of ideas, information, and for generating business opportunities for cargo airship development and deployment. Speakers will provide insights into topics that follow the principal themes of the workshop. To further support collaboration among the attendees a “Speed Networking” session will provide meeting rooms where airship developers, potential users, and potential investors/funders can conduct private discussions. The morning of the third day will feature a visit to Lynden Air Cargo, an Anchorage based air cargo company that operates commercial Lockheed Hercules aircraft where participants will learn about the challenges of air freighting cargo into remote northern regions.

Audience
• Commercial shipping companies, air freight companies
• Airship companies and aerospace vendors
• US and Canadian government organizations that employ cargo transport systems
• Construction companies, fisheries, resource extraction companies (Oil, Gas, and Mining companies)
• Venture capitalists, investment fund managers, private equity firms
• Researchers from government and academia
• Government agencies, State and Federal transportation program managers, Federal Aviation Administration, Transport Canada, military organizations
• Non-governmental organizations (NGO's), humanitarian relief agencies

Registration and Additional Information
Workshop announcements, including registration information will be e-mailed within the next week. The workshop’s website is being updated and will include announcements, venue information, registration information and exhibitor and sponsorship opportunities.

Our experience has shown that anything produced by ISO Polar or associated with them is authentic, first class, and worthwhile. Needless to say, NASA is Top Drawer.

As soon as we can provide more SPECIFIC information, we shall be sure to do so, and wil post it on the Airship Universe BLOG... OR you can GOOGLE on the search term ISO Polar or University of Alaska, Anchorage .

Revisiting the Hindenburg fire, Rethinking hydrogen's promise

Former NASA manager reconsiders the role of hydrogen in the 1937 disaster

Dr. Addison Bain has spent 20 years researching and testing a new theory behind the incident that almost tarnished hydrogen's reputation: the Hindenburg airship disaster in 1937.  This renowned author --- and manager of rocket fuel for NASA, now retired --- thinks that hydrogen has received unfair blame for the Hindenburg disaster, which in turn leads him to suggest its use as an energy source.

After spending many years in research, testing his new theory about the source and fuel for the 1937 fire on the Hindenburg Zeppelin, he now believes that hydrogen probably is no more dangerous than gasoline (petrol) when handled safely and has real potential as a source of energy for a variety of uses.

His new book, "The Freedom Element : Living with Hydrogen" suggests that hydrogen may, indeed, be a perfect fuel and energy carrier and producer. Bain presents a still controversial  theory, still unaccepted by many historians, scientists, and those searching for safe alternative fuels.

Dr. Bain believes that hydrogen was not the villain causing the Hindenburg's conflagration, although it may have been a factor in the intensity of the blaze that resulted. Indeed, Bain refers to hydrogen as the perfect fuel and energy carrier, and has tested this theory well enough to feel safe throughout its use as a rocket fuel. Surprisingly, hydrogen had apparently been considered as a fuel in the early days of the automobile; surprisingly, but even less well known, is its potential use in fuel cells. This latter technological breakthrough relies on its use in fuel cells to produce electricity right on board the vehicle, negating the need for traveling along paths where the auto (or other vehicle) can rely on a source of constant recharging of its batteries.

There is even talk of using liquid hydrogen in aircraft engines.

Hydrogen contains three times as much energy as the equivalent amount of gasoline, but when it burns under control, instead of the vile hydrocarbon compounds emitted by the gasoline engine, its exhaust consists of nothing more toxic than water vapor --- incorrectly tagged as "steam".

Where can hydrogen be obtained commercially? It is often falsely tagged as consuming more power to "refine" --- obtain --- from its sources than it can produce in practical use.

Currently, it can be obtained commercially from two sources : natural gas, of which it is a major component, and the hydrolysis (splitting and extracting) it from plain water. The space program that Dr. Bain's managed obtained it from the natural gas that occurs so abundantly buried in the earth in the Gulf of Mexico area around New Orleans.

                                                                                                           Dr. Bain pointed out that all three main engines on the very successful space shuttle ran on a mix of liquid hydrogen, carried in an external tank, and liquid oxygen.

When asked whether it was practical to use hydrogen as an automobile fuel, Bain explained that he had rigged his car to run on the hydrogen hydrolyzed (split) from his household water supply. After extracting the hydrogen, he compressed it, mixed it with compressed natural gas, and ran his Ford Crown Victoria on it, obtaining 150 miles from a tankful, although he admits he used gasoline as a backup.  .

When pressed about the Hindenburg fire, he referred to two separate Boards of Inquiry, in Germany and in the United States, which studied the incident very thoroughly. Although they initially named hydrogen as the culprit, they never resolved the issue of how the fire started. The Smithsonian Institution even placarded its Hindenburg display by alleging that "Its hydrogen exploded".

Dr. Bain began his refutation of that theory by explaining that the oxygen required to support a fire of that nature and size would have not allowed the Zeppelin to fly, as the flight of LTA airships requires a certain percentage of lighter-than-air gas (hydrogen), and that would have precluded enough oxygen to support combustion. 

Dr, Bain's independent investigation concluded that the outer covering of the airship's hull contained ingredients that were very highly flammable when mixed --- powdered aluminum and iron oxide. In fact, they are the very ingredients of a commercial product called Thermite. To point up the flammability and high temperature of its combustion, we can recall that Thermite is used industrially and commercially for on-site welding of railroad tracks at rail joints to melt the steel so that it forms a seamless joint.

However, powdered aluminum and iron oxide do not conduct electricity, and this allowed a charge of static electricity to build up on the outer surface of the airship. We also recall that one of the reasons for the delay in the Hindenburg's landing at Lakehurst was that there was a powerful thunderstorm over the Lakehurst area, typical for that time of year and season along the New Jersey shore. Those were the classic conditions for the buildup of electricity on surfaces that creates the necessary and sufficient conditions for lightning --- a powerful manifestation of static electrical buildup.

Germany had done similar testing in the years immediately following the disaster, and concluded that a static discharge within the fabric could ignite it without any hydrogen at all. Once the fabric was ignited by the static electricity, the hydrogen could well have accelerated the burning. Hydrogen is a sensitive fuel, and must be handled almost as carefully as gasoline (petrol).

Independent laboratories tested the fabric, after obtaining actual samples, and determined that it was coated with a butyl-based substance. 

Remember that the Hindenburg had previously compiled a safety record of 62 flights before that fateful day in 1937. Of those flights, many were long flights across the Atlantic Ocean, some continued on to South America.

Unfortunately, for this particular Lakehurst landing, the Hindenburg came in at a high landing altitude, almost three times its usual (normal) altitude. It is a meteorological reality that the electrical charge on a surface is a function of the altitude. That static charge actually increases by a value of 300 volts for every three feet of altitude.

All the situation required was a source of ignition. A backfire was reported from one of the engines, and Bain believes that this could have been the proximate cause. If readers will recall the days of the old auto engines installed in 1930's cars, the noisy  --- and common --- engine backfire often emitted very hot particulates from the exhaust, If, as is now believed, that hot particle flew over the top of the airship, it flew right into a set of  explosive conditions and could have acted as the trigger. 

Although no one will ever be able to prove the actual cause, that theory seems to hold more water, seems to have more of the pre-conditions necessary. Recall that this was the one of the first, most viewed explosions and fires. It was caught on news cameras of the day, with provocative commentary by a distraught newscaster whose on-air comments have gone down in history. This meant that it had extraordinary impact in those days before computers and the Internet.

The casualties numbered in the thirties; more are reported in automobile accidents every weekend in newscasts today, but have become so routine that we don't even pause in our Internet surfing.

Sadly, however, that newsreel footage provided the circumstances that ruled out lighter-than-air airships as passenger carriers for almost 70 years, although there is now a resurgence of interest in their use because of their many unique advantages.

Fortunately, because of the tireless dedication of men such as Dr. Bain, seeking the truth, and who are very cognizant of their massive responsibilities in the American space program, the real truth is in the process of emerging from the morass of speculation, ignorance, and downright obfuscation surrounding the Hindenburg disaster.

AIRSHIPS ... AIR FORCE ... WAIT A MINUTE, WHAT HAPPENED ?

A puzzling conundrum just occurred to me. As a former officer in the United States Air Force, I just have to ponder the following :

Let's see,

The Army should be responsible and authorized to act regarding everything happening on the ground. Check ! We agree.

The Navy should be responsible and authorized to act regarding everything happening on and under the oceans and rivers.  Check ! We agree.

Logically, therefore, the Air Force should be responsible and authorized to act regarding everything that flies in the air. Uh, oh ! Wait a minute !

Why isn't the Air Force similarly responsible for and authorized to act on the development, design, and operation of AIRships, such as blimps, dirigibles, hybrids, and so on ? Why aren't they on the cutting edge of flying the New Zeppelin ?

The Hindenburg disaster, you say ? If that were the thinking, why wouldn't the Titanic disaster or the Pearl Harbor disaster or the string of submarine disasters like the Thresher, the Squalus, scorpion, Chopper, or the Russian sub Kursk act as a similar deterrent to the Navy ? Why wouldn't the Charge of the Light Brigade in the Crimean War, and the Maginot Line in World War II  have similarly doomed the Army ?

I would welcome intelligent comments and discussion on that issue .

As if in response to this question I asked myself, there immediately appeared in my Googling the following  news :

Blue Devil Airship Maker Sends SOS                                         After Air Force Says Pack It Up

By Richard Whittle

Published: June 15, 2012

THE M1400 HYBRID UNMANNED BLUE DEVIL ISR AIRSHIP

WASHINGTON: This is a deflating month – literally --for Mav6, a small Mississippi defense company that's been working five years to complete a massive military airship, the unmanned M1400 Blue Devil II intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) craft.

On orders from the Air Force, "We've started to disassemble the airship," reports David Deptula, CEO of Mav6, who retired from the Air Force in October 2010 as a three-star general and deputy chief of staff for ISR. Mav6 and its supporters in Congress are hoping the Navy will save Blue Devil II from what they view as a short-sighted decision by the Air Force, which two years ago took over the project from the Army.

At 370 feet in length – longer than a football field -- and 1.4 million cubic feet in volume, the M1400 isn't just the largest airship built in half a century but also the largest unmanned aerial system ever. Inflated with helium last September and tethered inside a hangar 1,000 feet long in Elizabeth City, N.C., Blue Devil II last year won a "Best of What's New" award from Popular Science magazine, which called it a "floating military supercomputer."

Designed to carry as many as 10 modular sensor payloads weighing up to a combined 6,500 lbs. and to hover with them at 20,000 feet for five days -- far longer than airplane unmanned aerial systems like the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper -- Blue Devil II was begun in 2010 by the Army Engineering and Research Development Command as an "urgent operational need" for the war in Afghanistan. Among the sensors the airship is designed to carry are a wide-area airborne surveillance system with daylight and infrared cameras that can be cued by a signals intelligence intercept sensor. The airship also is to carry computers on board to process the imagery from its cameras and multiple data-links to stream it to analysts in a timely fashion. Tracking down insurgents planting improvised explosive devices was going to be Blue Devil II's primary mission in Afghanistan.

A Mav6 fact sheet contends that the Air Force, which "has openly stated they have no requirement for an airship," began trying to kill the program from the time it took it over from the Army in the fall of 2011, delaying payments to the contractor and adding requirements. The Air Force has subjected the  Blue Devil II to a slow death, first ordering Mav6 last January to stop doing the work required to fit the sensors and computers onto the airship, then, on May 23, telling the company to "deflate and crate" the aircraft.

"The decision to halt payload integration was based on several factors to include schedule delays, technical challenges, and higher than expected deployment costs," an Air Force statement on the project says. "Since that time, technical problems have remained to include flight control software, tailfin design and electrical system wiring." The Air Force has estimated that the potential cost of sending the airship to Afghanistan has doubled.

When the Air Force told the company to "deflate and crate" in May, the project was 12 percent over budget and eight months behind schedule. The fact sheet, however, argues that for another $3 million the airship could still make a first flight no later than Aug. 31, while draining the $350,000 worth of helium inside the dirigible and storing the equipment will cost $2.6 million. After spending $143 million on the airship and sensor payloads for it already, the government would be wiser to "allow a demonstration of the capabilities and viability of today's airship technology," argues Mav6.

Mav6 hopes the Navy might come to Blue Devil II's rescue because of that service's history of using airships. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division's Airship Systems Engineering Team did a favorable study of Blue Devil II in May that's been working its way up the Navy Department chain of command, and the fiscal 2012 defense budget still contains $55 million for the project that hasn't been spent.

"The Defense Department would be wise to capitalize on the investment they've made in this potentially game-changing capability," said Deptula, who is also a member of the AOL Defense Board of Contributors. "It provides the kind of persistence, modularity and cost effectiveness that's needed in the fiscally constrained future the Department of Defense is facing."

Blue Devil II doesn't have to sit over Afghanistan to provide valuable ISR, Mav6 argues. Stationed over a friendly nation such as Oman or the United Arab Emirates, for example, its daylight and infrared wide area airborne surveillance cameras and signals intelligence sensors could monitor the strategic Straits of Hormuz, the entrance to the Persian Gulf, and "see" as much as 200 miles into Iran.

Even though it's as large as it is, the airship would be nearly impossible for an enemy to shoot down, for the pressure differential on either side of its hull is minimal, meaning shells as large as 20mm would just pass through, Deptula said. It also has six engines, so taking out one won't bring it down. "You'd need about a 20-foot gash in this thing to make a difference, and even then it would settle gracefully," he said.

The Air Force, though, doesn't seem to have any problem shooting Blue Devil II down. The service's statement doesn't offer even a hint of support for the idea of letting the Navy take over, nor for using Blue Devil II for purposes other than the original plan to track IED planters in Afghanistan. "As the contract period of performance ends 30 June 2012," the Air Force said flatly, "the remaining time and funds will be used to disassemble, pack, and ship the residual equipment and hardware."

HYBRIDPELTA says "Words fail me; I rest my case !  Someone once defined oxymoron as a self-contradictory term, like 'military intelligence'; in the past, I have always vigorously defend the military. This time, despite the valiant efforts and counter-example provided by General Deptula, a dedicated and far-seeing senior Air Force officer, I may be forced to agree with the definition".