Boeing Delta-winged hybrid airship

Type of high-energy system that could be deployed on such a platform. This on is on a truck for demonstration, but I see no reason it couldn't be mounted on a flying platform as long as the aircraft is able to lift it.

www.boeing.com...

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I must not have gotten it becuase my ATS inbox is empty, unless I'm just looking in the wrong place.

originally posted by: JJRichey

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: Psynic

originally posted by: thebozeian
a reply to: JJRichey
Uhh, I was about to chastise another poster about bringing up nuclear reactors when I noticed you contradicted yourself and therefore left the way open for any speculation.

JJRichey

8. uses a propulsion system that is independent from fossil fuels and fuel cells and, therefore, does not limit the flight endurance of the aerial vehicle

Ok no problem so far.. then.

10. all-electric propelsion system powered by solar/fuel cells

So whch is it? Yo cant say on one point that it doesn't have fuel cells, and then four and a half lines later claim it does

LEE.

A "fuel cell" and a "solar cell" are completely different things.

"Fuel cell" refers to a 'hydrogen fuel cell' which relies on a consumable tank of hydrogen.

"Solar Cell" is more often referred to as a 'solar panel' and do not require refuelling .

The typical fuel cell combines Hydrogen and Oxygen to produce electricity and water.

(full stop)

This part I agree with.

The "recovering water and turning it back into water" part, not so much.

Combining a hydrogen fuel cell stack with solar panels to produce more hydrogen is definitely not the "typical" fuel cell I see in buses, forklifts, cars, submarines, stationary engines, aircraft etc etc.

Would you mind elaborating.

I believe what he is trying to say, is that the solar cell could be used to power the pump that would feed the water that is a byproduct of the hydrogen fuel cell, back into the fuel cell, resulting on less water used. Don't know how efficient that'd be or if it'd be worth the extra weight as oppossed to just carrying more fuel(water). At least that was how I read the post.

Fuel cells don't "use" water, they produce it.

They require Hydrogen as fuel and "typically" they don't use solar cells to produce it.


The question is can there be enough solar electric power in the daytime to produce enough hydrogen to get through a night.

a reply to: Psynic

Ahhhhhh ok. I was under the impression you'd use water as the fuel, it goes into the fuel cell, is separated, used to produce energy, and a little of the water is left over after. Thanks for that clarification. Guess I need to read up on hydrogen fuel cells.
So in reality, you do have to create hydrogen with some sort of catalytic device correct, that separates the 2 hydrogen atoms from the oxygen atom? Unless of course you are toting around a big tank of hydrogen of course.
Heres an interesting patent for a system to feed the waste-product water back into the system in a "variable gravity environment", i.e. for a vehicle that travels in the atmosphere and out of the atmosphere.
Self-Regulating Water Separation System for Fuel Cells

From what I understand, breaking down H2O is pretty energy intensive, so that is an interesting problem to have to tackle for the engineers. From the patent drawings for the craft though, it is pretty darn large and would probably be covered with flexiable solar cells (think Solar Impuse and other such vehicles).

There isn't really a point to this thread other than its something I'm interested in so please feel free to chime in with your thoughts.

And a NASA page on the technology
www.nasa.gov...--4

**Upon thinking upon it more, whats the point of using a hydrogen fuel cell to create electricity when you can just use some of the batteries that are already being used to create the first generation of electric powered aircraft. The only reason I can think of the manufacture hydrogen in flight is to replace hydrogen lost out of the envelope if the craft was (dangerously) filled with hydrogen instead of helium( or any other lighter than air gas). Todays battery technology is reaching the point where it can can be used to reliably fuel an electric motor driven propulsion system, and thats available right now on the commercial market. Who knows what the military has hidden away that may be magnitudes better. The batteries used in todays electric powered light aircraft [such as the Electra-flyer, self-launched(motor)gliders, many ultralights, etc.) are getting lighter and managing to pack more energy into them. At about 5k each, they aren't especially expensive for a commercial or military product either. Take a B2 sized hybrid rigid airship, cover the top with high-efficiency solar cells (which are getting more efficient all the time), put in some (4-6?) brushless electric motors (with folding props) and high density battery packs and away you go. An advantage of the flying wing shape is that it'll glide quite well if properly designed, perhaps even a 50:1 or better l/d ratio (50,000' per 1,000' lost in altitude. Todays competition gliders can get up to a 30:1, but include the larger lifting surfaces of the flying wing along with the almost neutrally buoyant, rigid helium filled lifting body might be able to achieve that or better. If you could glide half the time and motor back up to altitude the other half, you've double your endurance/loiter time right there.

Quote: "The typical fuel cell combines Hydrogen and Oxygen to produce electricity and water.
(full stop)

This part I agree with.

The "recovering water and turning it back into water" part, not so much.

Combining a hydrogen fuel cell stack with solar panels to produce more hydrogen is definitely not the "typical" fuel cell I see in buses, forklifts, cars, submarines, stationary engines, aircraft etc etc.

Would you mind elaborating."


Sorry, I must have had a senior moment and did not edit my post before pushing the "reply" button.

What I was TRYING to convey is that the Hydrogen and Oxygen are combined to create electricity and water in the fuel cell. The electricity is used to run electric motors that power the propellers and to power the payload (probably a radar or some such). The water is collected out of the fuel cell then hydrolyzed back into HYDROGEN and OXYGEN gases which, of course, requires electricity. The gases are stored and will eventually get recycled back through the fuel cell. The electricity for hydrolyzing the water and compressing it for storage comes from the solar cells.

a reply to: 1947boomer

But what is the advantage of having the fuel cells at all? Why not just run everything including propulsion off the electric? Per pound, are hydrogen fuel cells more efficient at creating energy than the same weight in solar?

originally posted by: JJRichey
a reply to: Jukiodone

Your mention of a pivot-able control fan reminds me of another patent I saw that was for a pivot-able control plate of sorts that would act as a sort of thrust vectoring.
www.google.com...

Heres a patent for using bursts of air to control direction in flight (from what I can understand of the patent anyways)
www.strutpatent.com...

I like this one for a differential thrust control system
www.google.com...

Interesting.
If you believe what people (who seemingly know what they are talking about on other more established topics) are saying; it could be quite likely to be some sort of boundary layer, plasma derived, atmospheric slip-streaming type trick!

Moving parts, raised propulsion profiles etc might be a bit behind the times!

a reply to: JJRichey

Sent it twice now. Not surprised if it doesn't show up. It's been common with my IM's over the last few months.