Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Liquid Hydrogen UAV

Posted by samzenpus on from the impulse-power dept.

From the same company that brought you the Wasp MAV, Aerovironment announced yesterday that they have successfully completed the world's first liquid hydrogen powered Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) flight tests. From the press release: " AeroVironment's Global Observer High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) platform will be able to operate at 65,000 feet for over a week with a flexible payload-carrying capacity of up to 1,000 pounds." Applications include government and military surveillance operations, communication relays, and the potential for persistent real-time imagery of wildfires, hurricanes, and other natural disasters. More pictures here.

41 of 157 comments (clear)

  1. You forgot! by metlin · · Score: 3, Funny

    Applications include government and military surveillance operations, communication relays, and the potential for persistent real-time imagery of wildfires, hurricanes, and other natural disasters.

    You forgot Gate Recon!!!

  2. Think of the possibilities... by KennyP · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hover over a nude beach and take hi-res pictures. It's every /.er's dream!

    Visualize Whirled P.'s

  3. What I'm wondering is by suitepotato · · Score: 4, Interesting

    how does it compare to the solar ones they wanted to fly which are supposed to stay up indefinitely? Also, are there applications for missions on Mars? Pretty neat accomplishment though.

    --
    If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
    1. Re:What I'm wondering is by jd · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Solar UAVs for spying would have a problem - if they're over the clouds, the camera sees nothing but clouds. If they're below the clouds, the solar panel sees nothing but clouds. Either way, it's not really that useful.


      The hydrogen-powered UAV would be good for exploring hurricanes over a prolonged period of time, as it could sit in the clouds near the eye and just monitor stuff, rather than having to return to base to refuel. That would mean weather centers would get some excellent continuous data, which might improve their forecasts of these types of system.


      For Mars, there are no clouds to contend with, so solar panels would work a great deal better overall. EXCEPT in sand-storms, where they'd not only be useless during the storm, they'd be so etched up at the end that they'd be useless afterwards, too. If you plan on studying Martian storms up-close, carrying your own fuel would have some major benefits. (Remember, they'd need to carry their own oxygen, too, though.)


      A potential civilian use for this kind of technology would be in fighting wildfires. The late Red Adair, and others like him, fought fires with high explosives, but those tend to leave a lot of very eco-unfriendly residue.


      On the other hand, if you were to have a remote-control aircraft with a large amount of liquid hydrogen aboard, it could potentially have much the same effect (deprive the fire of oxygen) but with a lot less environmental impact.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:What I'm wondering is by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Informative

      "For Mars, there are no clouds to contend with, so solar panels would work a great deal better overall. EXCEPT in sand-storms, where they'd not only be useless during the storm, they'd be so etched up at the end that they'd be useless afterwards, too. If you plan on studying Martian storms up-close, carrying your own fuel would have some major benefits. (Remember, they'd need to carry their own oxygen, too, though.)"

      The bigger problem with one of these on Mars is the thinner atmosphere. It's a lot harder to fly a vehicle like that on Mars than it is on Earth.

      And, no, I'm not really that smart. I read about it in PopSci or something.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    3. Re:What I'm wondering is by poopdeville · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Solar UAVs for spying would have a problem - if they're over the clouds, the camera sees nothing but clouds. If they're below the clouds, the solar panel sees nothing but clouds. Either way, it's not really that useful.

      Don't be silly. These things cruise at 65,000 feet, higher than anything but storm clouds. And they're designed to stay up for a week at a time. Unless a storm stays over one spot for three to four days, these things will eventually do their jobs. The U2 flies so high that the pilot must wear a space suit.

      Frankly, I suspect this announcement is related to the recent loss of a U2 in South East Asia.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    4. Re:What I'm wondering is by DieByWire · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Solar UAVs for spying would have a problem - if they're over the clouds, the camera sees nothing but clouds. If they're below the clouds, the solar panel sees nothing but clouds. Either way, it's not really that useful.

      Clouds aren't the issue. There are lots of other ways to look at or listen to things than visible light. The problem with the solar version is payload. Helios had to be incredibly light to fly on solar power - it had a 247 ft wingspan, yet weighed only 1500 pounds. It broke up in flight two years ago. AV's Global Observer has a 1000 pound payload.

      The hydrogen-powered UAV would be good for exploring hurricanes over a prolonged period of time, as it could sit in the clouds near the eye and just monitor stuff

      For endurance you need high aspect ratio wings. Think U-2, think Steve Fossett's round the world flight. To survive in the clouds near a hurricane, you have to be built like a P-3 - short, stubby, stronger than hell wings. This thing might fly high over a hurricane, but it would never survive in one.

      A potential civilian use for this kind of technology would be in fighting wildfires. The late Red Adair...

      Red Adair fought well fires.

      On the other hand, if you were to have a remote-control aircraft with a large amount of liquid hydrogen aboard, it could potentially have much the same effect (deprive the fire of oxygen) but with a lot less environmental impact.

      Now there's a great idea. Starve the fire of oxygen by having all of the oxygen combine with a bunch of free hydrogen, creating nothing but water vapor... oh, and a little bit of heat. Heck, you could just use a KC-135 and dump raw gas or jet fuel on it for the same effect, no new technology needed.

      --
      Never shake hands with a man you meet in a fertility clinic.
    5. Re:What I'm wondering is by jd · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Now there's a great idea. Starve the fire of oxygen by having all of the oxygen combine with a bunch of free hydrogen, creating nothing but water vapor... oh, and a little bit of heat. Heck, you could just use a KC-135 and dump raw gas or jet fuel on it for the same effect, no new technology needed.


      The heat would be immaterial, with no oxygen present, and the shockwave would displace air in the surroundings.


      True, you'd cause a ruddy big hole in the ground. On the other hand, I think I'd prefer to deal with a hole in the ground (which can be filled) and relatively few trees pulverized over and above uncontrollable fires that devastate a few million or so acres.


      In other words, yes, the local damage would be severe, but at present, firefighting techniques rely solely on containment and letting the fire burn itself out, which is completely useless until the fire reaches fire breaks, as there simply is no other point at which you can meaningfully contain a fire.


      There really aren't that many fire breaks, and there would be no way to make enough without cutting down at least 10% of all the trees, possibly more if you want to really prevent the fire leaping the gap.


      My suggestion of destroying the fire by explosion would - on the whole - be far less damaging to the forests than creating enough fire breaks to use the containment system effectively OR waiting until the fire reaches the edge of a forest, which is typically what happens now.


      And even in the area of destruction, I would expect far more trees to withstand a brief explosion (plant matter is fairly tough stuff) far better than a continuous fire. After any devastating forest fire, you will see some burned trees that are still "alive" - they sprout new growth. If a tree is still upright, after an explosion, there's a good chance it will be largely unaffected and will grow perfectly normally.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re:What I'm wondering is by bcattwoo · · Score: 2, Informative
      The reason why explosives work to put out well fires is that the fuel source is relatively confined and thus it is fairly easy to separate the fuel from the oxygen long enough to snuff out the fire.

      In a forest fire the fire is completely surrounded by additional fuel. Between the heat of the explosion and the burning embers and such that would undoubtedly be thrown in to the air, you would be more likely to spread the fire rather than put it out.

      Besides, I would think that in many cases forest fires may be tens of acres in size by the time they are finally detected, located, and the appropriate response teams are deployed. It would take quite the large boom to suck the air out of that kind of space.

  4. Re:Way cool by Orion83 · · Score: 3, Funny

    hm.....with all of that hydrogen on board,
    more like,

    Is this a bomb??

  5. Useful for spying by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I understand the need for good intelligence in making national security policy, but flying spyplanes over the airspace of your friends and enemies alike isn't going to win you any brownie points, and as the US has already experienced with the U2 (the crashed plane, not the band that's selling out), one crashed spyplane can lead to a hell of a lot of trouble.

    Spying is a nasty business, and I guess it's a necessary evil, but the person in charge of announcing new toys at Aerovironment must be completely braindead. Someone at the State department ought to go have a talk with those good folks.

    1. Re:Useful for spying by joeljkp · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm at this conference right now (it ends tomorrow). Everything here is about spying. Every display booth here is about high resolution camera systems, hardened data storage, remote sensing, and a miriad other things useful for spying, whether it be over the next hill or over another country.

      Even the student competition that I'm a part of has spying as its primary objective (autonomous navigation and target recognition).

      --
      WeRelate.org - wiki-based genealogy
  6. Solar energy by William+Robinson · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The wings look really big. Why dont they think about including solar panels on the wings?

    --
    hilarious
    1. Re:Solar energy by ikkonoishi · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well you don't really have to hook the solar panels up to anything...

    2. Re:Solar energy by coopex · · Score: 2, Funny

      So, if I understand you, you wanna rice out this UAV, but in a geek way? Oh the humanity.

      --
      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
  7. Article Unclear by compmanio36 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So, is this vehicle running a fuel cell type setup? Or is there some other way of using liquid hydrogen?

    Either way, is this something that can be put into cars? It seems if they can keep an airplane up for over a week, a car would really benefit from this technology.

    Of course, cars tend to get into accidents a bit more often than unmanned planes. Would hydrogen be as volatile in a liquid state?

  8. torrents and mirrors galore! by xbmodder · · Score: 4, Informative

    pictures: http://mirrordot.org/stories/aaf0c842dfe20788ff7a5 5f10aff4b6d/index.html
    The main page:
    http://mirrordot.org/stories/d1d8af49f65278e926452 b7286f69bcb/index.html

    other mirror:
    http://xbmodder.us/www.aerovironment.com/

    my picture mirror (don't hit this) only do this if you can't get the torrent:
    http://xbmodder.us/www.aerovironment.com/global-ob server/go_pictures.htm

    torrent:
    http://xbmodder.us/global-observer.torrent

  9. Liquid Hydrogen? by DarkHelmet · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh the humanity!

    --
    /^[A-Z0-9._%+-]+@[A-Z0-9.-]+\.[A-Z]{2,4}$/i
  10. More on Defense Tech by noahmax · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's more on this and other long-range UAVs over at Defense Tech -- including a solar-powered drone that just set endurance records.

  11. Re:Way cool by cujo_1111 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is it painted with an aluminium based paint on a canvas substrate?

    --
    If I point out that you are incorrect, making me a foe does not make you any more correct.
  12. What about my gas helium UAV? by geekwithsoul · · Score: 5, Funny

    Big deal! I took my kid to the circus the other day and got him a gas helium Unmanned Aerial Vehicle for free. They just handed it to him on a string, we untied the bottom, and whoosh! . . . it took off and flew all by itself.

  13. Re:Weapons of Mass Destruction? by evilviper · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Not a chance. The US has had UAVs for a LONG TIME, and that didn't change a thing. Where did you think they got the Aerial photos they showed to the UN, claiming it was a bio weapons lab? UAVs.

    --
    Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  14. HFC but it probably pollutes. by reality-bytes · · Score: 2, Funny


    Judging by the array of little props on the leading edge of the wing, this UAV is probably Hydrogen Fuel-Cell powered.

    However, if I recall, Hydrogen Fuel Cells, which produce water as a by-product would actually contribute to ozone depletion because water acts like a greenhouse-gas at altitudes over ~27,000ft.

    Luckily, these little things probably don't produce all that much water. - Unless they build one each to spy on everyone in the world! ;-)

    --
    Ripping an new rectum in the fabric of spacetime.
  15. Fuel and Payload in One Small Package! by billstewart · · Score: 4, Insightful
    It's not a WMD with just hydrogen explosive, though there are UAVs that can carry a 50-kilo payload, enough for a US backpack-sized tactical nuke.

    It wouldn't have helped the US avoid falsely accusing Iraq of making WMDs, partly because it's not good enough to tell a "baby milk factory" or "pharmaceuticals factory" from a "chemical weapons factory". But the big problem was that the US government *wanted* the conclusion to be "Iraq has SCARY WMDs" to convince the US public to let them invade again, and anything that simply flies over and says "no, didn't see anything suspicious on the outside of those factory buildings" isn't going to either change the propaganda policy or tell the military planners not to target a factory-shaped building.

    On the other hand, better UAVs would help improve targeting for the things they did want to blow up, or at least let them see whether groups of people were wearing uniform-colored cloths or not.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  16. Insulation by Muhammar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I would like to know how they solved the problem of cryo storage of liquid hydrogen. Sure the air temperature and thermal conductivity at high altitudes is decreased but this can help only so much. I just dont see how they can keep it at minus 259C for one week. Dewar made of plastic? Pressurizing it would not help because at -240C hydrogen stops being liquid regardless of the pressure.

    My guess is that one big tank fills up most of the pregnant-looking belly. The craft may need some teflon coating on the surface to prevent ice buildup. Also, it is apparent from the video that landing it in even modest crosswind will be tricky business (as with any large-wingspan ultralight).

    --
    I doubt that we will ever figure out - and I suspect that even if we did figure out we couldn't do much about it
    1. Re:Insulation by LordMyren · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The coolant chamber for the Saturn rocket was reported to be so efficient it would loose only 2.5 degrees over a ten year span, or some similarly perposterous metric. Course, that was space, but we are exceedingly good at erecting some magnificient thermal barriers.

      Hydrogen has suh an energy content that for a significant sized ship (read: not this tiny thing)dumping a little bit of fuel into energy to refridgerate would not be in any way a problem. The only real problem as far as I see is safety issues of storing.

      I seriously look forward to seeing future high speed hydrogen powered planes. I think we'll finally see a departure from the tuna can in the sky principle.

      -Myren

    2. Re:Insulation by aXis100 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Easy.

      You let some of the liquid hydrogen evaporate (called boil off gas) - that draws thermal energy from the remaining liquid like an evaporative cooler. You can then consume that boil off gas in your turbines/fuel cell/whatever.

      This method is commonly used on LPG tankers.

  17. Re:What about Commercial Aircraft? by kfg · · Score: 3, Funny

    Nah! If I can just get my rubber powered balsa prototypes to scale up I'll have 'em beat.

    KFG

  18. Re:What about Commercial Aircraft? by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 3, Insightful
    the $60 a barrel prive for oil is driving jet fuel costs through the room. It seems like if Boeing or Airbus could get some of this type of engine technology working in large commercial aircraft, they could make a killing.

    The problem is that the closest supply of gaseous hydrogen is on Jupiter. So here on earth, it's artificially manufactured from natural gas, whose price correlates very closely to the price of oil.

  19. What the world needs right now by lheal · · Score: 2, Insightful

    is one more really good album cover.

    I believe the RIAA is suffering from the lack of hydrogen-fueled airships. All they have now are rock stars looking old, male hip-hop artists looking mean, and female hip-hop artists looking ... as female as possible.

    Give me a snapshot of burning hell falling from the sky once in a while, and maybe I'll pay $19.95 for your amelodious drivel.

    And I'm not even a Led Zep fan.

    --
    Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
  20. Re:Weapons of Mass Destruction? by child_of_mercy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    satellites mostly.

    --
    'There is a Light that never goes out.'
  21. High Altitude Telescopes by pin_gween · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How about a purely scientific use? Week long telescope surveys of space. Would be high enough to lose atmospheric blurring and short enough to collect lots of data, return to earth, then be reconfigured for another mission.

    --
    Ignorance is not a crime; neither should it be a way of life

    Congress control $ = inmates run the asylum
    1. Re:High Altitude Telescopes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You would take a nice, stable telescope off of the ground and put it on a craft that vibrates like hell and your pictures would come out pretty bad (not to mention that your telescope would be so small that it wouldn't have near the resolving power that the ground scope would have).

  22. Re:What about Commercial Aircraft? by ndansmith · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I could see this sort of technology acting as a power assist for commercial aircraft, but it impractical.

    First of all you have the weight, the craft is as skinny as rail, and only carries 1000 pounds. That is in the sub-feather-weight class of airplanes. I doubt that this same powertrain could drive a plane full of cargo and/or passengers.

    You also have the functional question. This technology is for staying in the air for a week. It does not have what the airlines need. Passengers are looking to get from A to B as fast as possible.

    Basically this is a great idea, but I cannot see it impacting the commercial air industry any time soon.

  23. Very funny, Your Majesty by ashitaka · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The distorted views that maps.google.com gives are a great reason to get Google World. Buckingham Palace looks messed up.

    I live a 15-minute bike ride from Wreck Beach which is actually here.

    Do I got there? No. This is Canada, not Rio or the south of France. You get people looking at you. The wrong type of people. Wrecks everything. (so to speak)

    --
    If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
  24. Re:What about Commercial Aircraft? by Sparohok · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What makes you think hydrogen has any advantages over kerosene (jet fuel) for commercial aircraft? Hydrogen has a lower energy density, it's far more expensive, and it's much harder to store. The only (debatable) advantage is environmental and that hardly outweighs the crushing disadvantages.

    The press release is mighty short on details, but I assume this UAV uses electric motors. Presumably liquid hydrogen and a fuel cell is lighter than batteries. It's a great solution if your goal is to fly very slowly for a long, long time. Not so good if you want to move half a million pounds at 600mph.

    Martin

  25. Re:I already know how it ends by NIK282000 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Mind you the silver paint on that flaming blimp is now used as rocket fuel.

    --
    Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
  26. Still not my favorite UAV... by cryptocom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...my favorite was the D-21 drone, code named Senior Bowl/Tagboard...originally launched off the back of an SR71 Blackbird, but later launched from the wing of a B-52 bomber. not much endurance, but holy shit could that thing fly...
    PERFORMANCE
    Maximum speed: Mach 3.3
    Range: 3,400+ miles
    Service Ceiling: ABOVE 90,000 ft.

    --
    It takes just a moment and an action to destroy. It takes some time and thought to create.
  27. Re:Way cool by Yazeran · · Score: 2, Informative

    1000 lbs, that's like 500 kg or half a ton, I think both the US and Russia has fusion warheads that small.

    Think about the MIRW technology for the ICBM's, The sattelite versions of the missiles can loft a 5 ton sattelite into orbit, but at the same time can loft a MIRV (with multiple warheads) half way across the world.

    After approx 1 min of googling i found this link to the W88 warhead with an approx weight of less than 800 lbs and a yield of approx 450 kton (a fusion device to be sure).

    Yours Yazeran

    Plan: To go to Mars one day with a hammer.

  28. I am a roboticist by Dogsbody_D · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's better to say that UAV stands for "Unoccupied Aerial Vehicle." That way you can't just get a woman pilot and pocket the DARPA dollars.

  29. Super Conducting Motors by GavrielPlotke · · Score: 2, Informative

    In addition to Hydrogen's advantage of a very high energy to weight ratio, its very low temperature could be used to cool an airplane's superconducting electric motor to the required operating temperature. Such motors can be 1/3rd the weight of conventional motors for the same power, as well as being significantly more efficient.

    Perfect for small UAVs patrolling battle sites.

    Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these!