3 ms·
> Why would you even try to whitewash it like that? Because non-flammable, inert gases aren't that useful for pushing things into space. The window of discussi
by oliwarner 4y ago
> Why would you even try to whitewash it like that?
Because non-flammable, inert gases aren't that useful for pushing things into space. The window of discussion here (in the broader sense, obv) is inherently explosive.
Yes, there's an important safety aspect here but NASA aren't taking advice from HN threads.
I happen to agree with GP. While hydrogen provides certain challenges, the human race has to embrace it. It's possibly the only workaround for a near-time methane shortage, especially as it can be generated locally (and cheaply) via PV. A much cheaper "battery" than Li-based batteries, and possibly a fuel for CCGT power stations to run from (blended and not).
- dylan604 4y agothe actual window of discussion was launching a weather balloon. the weight of the payload was less than 16oz. it was not attempting to achieve orbit. its sole purpose was to go as high as the expansion of the balloon material would allow at whatever speed it could before falling back to terra firma. it was tale of how me personally had a near experience using hydrogen, but was convinced that might just be a bad idea. the fact that a NASA rocket is experiencing an issue with hydrogen is what prompted me to share the story. everyone else seeems to think i'm launching rockets with hydrogen as a fuel source.
- fnordpiglet 4y agoWell, it was handling a tank of compressed hydrogen. In your story the balloon was just a foil.