Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ut-ngp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!mercury
From: mercury@ut-ngp.UUCP (Larry E. Baker)
Newsgroups: net.misc,net.physics
Subject: Re: Hydrogen (isn't flammible?!?)
Message-ID: <1508@ut-ngp.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 28-Mar-85 15:09:27 EST
Article-I.D.: ut-ngp.1508
Posted: Thu Mar 28 15:09:27 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 31-Mar-85 03:14:09 EST
References: <608@vortex.UUCP>, <491@spp2.UUCP> <5336@utzoo.UUCP> <187@ihlpm.UUCP> <708@mhuxt.UUCP>
Organization: University of Texas at Austin
Lines: 24
Xref: watmath net.misc:7707 net.physics:2349

[]

> > I saw a film somewhere (whose name I forget) about using hydrogen as
> > a fuel. It seems that John Q. Public isn't ready for it -- street
> > interviews showed that everybody thought of the Hindenburg.
> > Laura Creighton
> > utzoo!laura
> The Hindenburg used helium instead of hydrogen. Helium is 
> considerable more flammable. Germany had used it because
> there was an embargo of hydrogen against it.
> 					Bob Crowley
>

If I remember my history trivia correctly, one of the reasons the
Hindenberg was on its way to the United States was because Hitler
wanted to convince the US to provide it with Helium, as the Zeppelin
was swiftly becoming an obsolite weapon due to the flammibility of its
*Hydrogen*.  They were, with the British incendary bullets, simply too
easy to shoot down.


-- 
-  Larry Baker @ The University of Texas at Austin
-  ...{seismo!ut-sally | decvax!allegra | tektronix!ihnp4}!ut-ngp!mercury