Dope Tech Episode 2

<<@veritasium says : We posted this video yesterday, but took it down soon after when we noticed an error. Here’s take 2 - thank you for watching!>> <<@VulcanRumble says : You should have also compared it to the Silk Road Rail System of Europe and Conveyor Belts.>> <<@KurzAstra says : I got Wisper Flow Ad.>> <<@IzludeTingel says : they found out the Hindenburg was a psyop. now people are ready to just start doing it again, and this time, zero fear of the misinformation.>> <<@DaVinciCostaRica-n8r says : NOT TRUE! As an airship designer for projects in 8 countries over the past 40 years, I agree that POWER needed does generally benefit from the cubed vs squared size advantage. STRUCTURAL WEIGHT DOES NOT. PERIOD.>> <<@MarkgarelEmbrado says : Airship getting comeback? Ofc they look cool and beeg>> <<@luggas5095 says : I find this a really interesting engineering sector. Does anyone have some recommendations on scientific groups/institutes/universities playing a leading role in development/research in this area? Aswell as current companies exploring this idea? Thanks already!>> <<@Green-animates101 says : CALL THEM DIRGIBLES OR AEROSTATS IM A DELIVERY NOT GUARANTEED PLAYER>> <<@Kaddy-i2z9 says : 1 out of 100s and no one sad it a bout air planes in the 20 and 30s and c/mpre air ships was the way but the big $$$ was ing airplans so see it for whit is>> <<@ezpeazy5300 says : Helium is precious and non renewable. What fantasy is this? And carbon emissions arguments?Sigh. If your gonna go green angle tackle the nanoplastic flood we are dealing with. Microplastics are not the final degradation product. And this is a REAL and immediate crisis.>> <<@heshdaddy4207 says : The ending of the video was great, I believe to solve the issue of difference in atmospheric buoyancy, would be to carry the same amount of weight constantly (kind of like how a trucker is constant in carrying loads from point A to B)introducing governmental regulations with programs like the FAA could support an equilibrium in the issue itself.>> <<@heshdaddy4207 says : They’re very technically making a Gojira joke>> <<@GG_CosmicCrusade says : So all pirates have to do is harpoon a few of these and all a sudden we are back where we started>> <<@benisonline-y3k says : Enjoyed the video very much!>> <<@xbsr3x says : 0:19 While a retired NASA scientist proposed the "Incendiary Paint Theory" in 1997-arguing that this chemical combination essentially turned the Hindenburg's skin into rocket fuel or thermite-this theory has been widely debunked by historians and chemists. To make a functioning thermite reaction, the ingredients must be mixed perfectly in a specific chemical ratio (roughly 3 parts iron oxide to 1 part aluminum) and ground into an incredibly fine, homogeneous powder. On the Hindenburg, the ingredients were separated by different layers of paint and the ratio was inverted (abt 5 parts aluminum to 1 part iron oxide), meaning there was less than 10% of the iron oxide needed to actually support a thermite reaction. Ultimately, historical consensus remains that the rapid destruction of the airship was driven primarily by a hydrogen fire triggered by an electrostatic discharge, rather than a thermite reaction on the skin>> <<@ScarfDudGT says : War thunder hear our cries>> <<@Jay-rAlbinoHQ says : Could the sudden increase in lift during cargo unloading be solved with a ground-based ballast exchange system? For example, if an airship arrives carrying 100 tons of cargo, the destination could have a 100-ton water reserve ready. As the cargo is unloaded, an equivalent mass of water could be pumped into the airship simultaneously, keeping its total weight and center of gravity controlled. The airship would then depart carrying the water ballast, which could be exchanged for its next cargo at another prepared terminal. This could eliminate the need for the airship to carry permanent ballast during flight.>> <<@subprized says : If the airship wobbles too much because of the air then just drop a giant anchor it would make the airship a lot more heavier than you would need a even bigger airship which means more Air drag which also means you need a bigger anchor then it would keep looping and that just breaks that idea 💡>> <<@CookmasterJeff says : 2:48 How about Trucks for countries not divided by a sea/ ocean?>> <<@kawaiisame594 says : They don't emit enough CO2 hence why they arent used>> <<@OscarLok-i8i says : Drones? they can do everything this can>> <<@GolfLyfeStone says : What if you had ballast tanks that could offset the weight if you have water stored in the front and back, then you add weight to the middle as you're dropping your load and then pump it back to the front and back once equalization happens. Also, to get more lyft, they could add small rocket boosters or even just wings with propellers in them. You could even have anchors that shoot into the ground and release when needing to take back off. Or some kind of magnetic tower that connects to all three points front, middle and back.>> <<@GeometryofShame says : Except look at the footprint of landing those things for loading/unloading and inner city delivery. Not happening.>> <<@richardsilljohnson6377 says : We need AIRSHIPS now in Nepal to drop clinics in spots with no road access>> <<@Brsoberanos says : The big problem is, if everyone loves airships, why don't we see them in the skies? I would never fly if airships existed.>> <<@CheesecakeLoverOP says : Maybe they got rid of airships because they don't want us to know the earth is flat?>> <<@RichardCollins-w1l says : whatever happened to hot air? freely available, just add heat>> <<@Pimienta-w4x says : im still waiting for them airships>> <<@td5816 says : As mentioned in the video the transport of large pieces of wind turbines could be simplified with airships. In Germany about 60.000 heavy transports for wind turbines will be needed per year. For one wind turbine up to 150 transports must be approved individually. The transports for one turbine can cost more than 1.000.000€>> <<@British_On_The_Beat says : 7:17 you didn’t actually compare amazon and apple to Walmart right???>> <<@RHIN6 says : why dont we use large hot air baloons?>> <<@PlanetComicsStories says : My proposal is that we built the first cargo airships at 200-245 meters long, because the Hindenburg confirmed that a 245-meter airship can fly. Then we'll run some tests on how we can deal with the problems, if we find a way to solve them, they can be the first commercial cargo airships, and after a few decades, we can build airships even bigger than the Hindenburg>> <<@tremorist says : Lol, no.>> <<@RobertNeill-t8z says : Increase in fuel costs and the supply or market volatility will be some factors in the future.>> <<@Jonathan-wl4ep says : Why can’t I understand that water vapour won’t work 🤨🤫>> <<@jasonbanks7574 says : There was a point in time when someone looked at the horse & carriage and though..... “this is CANNOT be the future”. Well, drive enough on America’s interstates and you’ll say the same thing about all the 18-wheeler trucks clogging the roads.>> <<@OGMimikyu says : Can’t you compress the helium back to a liquid ?>> <<@AZAZA0009990 says : To co niektórzy piszą to bzdury sterowiec byłby bezpieczny przy dzisiejszej technologi i nie prawda że były napełnianie na ziemi posiadały własne wytwórnie wodoru na pokładzie podczas lotu były uzupełniane braki gazu mógł latać nawet kilka miesięcy bez lądowania dlaczego zlikwidowali bo były tanie w utrzymaniu i rokofeler by nie zarobił to tak jak z samochodami elektrycznymi z przetwornicą tesli darmowy prąd korporacje zniszczyli dobre technologie to złe lepiej spalać tony paliwa w odrzutowcach banda i tyle>> <<@woobenskypierre6224 says : Could drop/store some of the gas at the location>> <<@darkdownmagic says : just use anchors for stabalization duh lmao>> <<@dimitristripakis7364 says : One problem is that the clip showing a blimp loading containers from a ship = impossible. Think about it. If it already descents, then if you load it up more it will crash. It's not easy to do buoyancy control at container weight level>> <<@itsumonihon says : Airships on emergency sites is probably not going to be a thing - they're not fast enough and they don't carry enough cargo for them to make enough cost effective impact. That is unless they're fully automated on modular automated docking platforms. If these things operate on fully autonomous routes, with autonomous loading and unloading, they become the most efficient domestic transport vehicle I can think of aside from rail, and these have vastly more flexibility and speed than rail. They just can't operate in severe wind.>> <<@michaellowe5558 says : The stigma around hydrogen needs to be addressed. It is 90% cheaper than helium. Because helium is EXPENSIVE. The solution to the problem of the airship shooting up too fast after dropping a heavy load was addressed by the Germans more than 100 years ago. They used Blau gas. Just find a way to quickly pump hydrogen back into a tank, and quickly pump Blau gas out into a ballast bag. Also, the larger the zepeplin is, the less likely it will suddenly jump up into the sky after dropping a heavy load. Solution would probably involve propellers to help counteract the jolt. Also, if you travel with another zeppelin that is still heavy, you can buddy up to it so the jolt is shared. Have them travel in pairs. Also, when the final delivery is made, why is it such a bad thing that the zeppelin shoots up into the sky? Now you can travel back home at a good altitude. Aerodynamic lift is great, but what if you want to hover. That seems kind of important for a zeppelin, if not the main point of it. The hangar size problem: just be modular. Make sections at a time, then join them together later. You don't build an entire zeppelin at one time. Certification problem: easy. Make the zeppelin in China. Use it to move product across and around the Pacific. You don't need to land at airports, you can hover over any open space and drop the cargo, including a bay or inlet. Believe me, once this catches on, the authorities will have no choice but to certify.>> <<@Austriaisthebest_ says : I find them so cool>> <<@wukids1475 says : The animation is so clean!>> <<@debrawest5750 says : They're already part of mass surveillance. Not sure when this video came out but SCEYE has been building airships for awhile in New Mexico. There are other countries around the globe. SCEYE is building them for "communications" between the ground and satellites. They are surveilling weather, atmosphere, natural disasters, etc. Their website says they watch humans too.>> <<@GabrielHumphries-f3r says : no the Hindenburg is faster than the Titanic really>> <<@cadmaster123 says : Classic Good, Fast, Cheap problem>> <<@Scevenex says : A lot of this video has the hallmarks of pseudoscience and "theorycrafting" engineering which are the hallmarks of grifters and people who have no idea what they're doing. Think of Elon Musk as a prime example of this "tech bro" sales pitch. Promises the moon, ultra efficiency, low cost, capable of doing everything and anything and it's SO MUCH BETTER! They even have CG renders! ... Until they try to build it and realize all their simplifying assumptions have lots of problems with them, and that they aren't reliable, and that they're fragile, and that actually building and maintaining the things is dozens of times harder and more costly than these "experts" predicted. This video is two years old now. In it, they claimed several of these airships would be in use by 2026. Are they? I doubt it.>> <<@truefhk says : I though a viable solution for compressing the gás with current technology if any of those companies would like to hear me out, just message me.>>