Warbird Information Exchange

bdk wrote:



Yes, but Mr. Muraski is picking on me because all I said was it will burn. I didn't say oxygen wasn't there.

The Hindenburg was designed for Helium, but the only source for it was the US, which embargoed shipments to Nazi Germany. I believe the US still keeps (or kept until recently) helium stocks as a national security asset.

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.

Helium is rare, and from what I have heard (maybe I am wrong) it leaves the atmosphere because it's lighter than air and doesn't combine with other elements like hydrogen. So it must be mined.

Isolated from certain natural gas deposits. Until the 90's the US produced 90% of the helium available on earth. (as opposed to the universe at large where it accounts for 24% of all observable matter )

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.

that cloth was called gold beaters cloth. i had a piece from the graf zeppelin about the size of an open matchbook. i had the provinence on it as well. sold it to a big time
zep collector for a very nice profit. i can't believe history authorities are re-hashing this again. most of these theories have been concluded countless times!!

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

fyi...... there is a national shortage of helium. darn!!! can't do any oz munchkin songs!!!

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

AFIK the gas cells were made of goldbeaters skin (cattle intestine), the outer coverings was doped fabric laced to the framework.

Uh, does anyone here doubt that the sun is "burning"?

The sun is 91.2% hydrogen, 8.7% helium, and the remaining 0.1% several "trace" gases.

So, I have to ask - where is the oxidizer that you say must be present for the hydrogen to burn?

_________________
“To invent the airplane is nothing. To build one is something. But to fly is everything!” - Otto Lilienthal

Natasha: "You got plan, darling?"
Boris: "I always got plan. They don't ever work, but I always got one!"

Remember, any dummy can be a dumb-ass...
In order to be a smart-ass, you first have to be "smart"
and to be a wise-ass, you actually have to be "wise"

Isn't that nuclear fusion, vs. rapid oxidization or burning?

I've referred to it as 'that low grade hydrogen experiment' for years just because it makes the brain deads stop and you can almost hear the gears grinding and screeching-

_________________
Don't make me go get my flying monkeys-

The sun involves fusion, not burning, with the fusion taking place in the core heating up the rest.
wiki
"In the inner portions of the Sun, nuclear fusion has modified the composition by converting hydrogen into helium, so the innermost portion of the Sun is now roughly 60% helium, with the metal abundance unchanged."

_________________
Chris Mellor

Yes, the sun involves fusion, not combustion - but it is still "burning".

You are apparently limiting yourself and the verb "to burn" to refer to the process of combustion in particular, but that is not the only meaning of "burn".

http://oald8.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/dictionary/burn_1

It can mean simply to be on fire or just to produce heat and/or flames. The fusion in the sun produces heat and what appears to be flames, therefore it is valid to say that it is burning. It is not valid to say that it is combusting, but it is consuming its fuel.

A "fuel" is said to "burn" if it is subjected to or engaged in a chemical (or nuclear) reaction which causes it to produce heat, light, or any other form of energy during which it is also consumed. Therefore it is valid to say that the hydrogen "fuel" in the sun is "burning" and by extension, the sun itself as well.

Nobody here said that the sun was combusting.

There are many other uses for and meanings of "to burn" as well. When your skin turns red after spending too much time outside on a clear and sunny day, it has been "burned" but there has been no combustion. That's one.

_________________
“To invent the airplane is nothing. To build one is something. But to fly is everything!” - Otto Lilienthal

Natasha: "You got plan, darling?"
Boris: "I always got plan. They don't ever work, but I always got one!"

Remember, any dummy can be a dumb-ass...
In order to be a smart-ass, you first have to be "smart"
and to be a wise-ass, you actually have to be "wise"

Imagine the headline "Nuclear Reactor Burning" when all it is doing is running happily, producing heat and hopefully in full control.

In context, what happened to the Hindenburg was different from what happens in the sun.
One was a chemical reaction (burning) the other is nuclear.

_________________
Chris Mellor

Speaking of burning (combustion) I've always liked "breakaway oxidation phenomenon" as a fine euphemism for "fire"

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.

This is all well and good, but the Hindenburg combusted (not burned in a nuclear fusion incident) and crashed. Have you heard? I wonder though if they were referring to the real Hindenburg or the movie Hindenburg? Or did they both combust and burn in an exothermic oxidative reaction?