Comment

Comment on Horror

Now I’m wondering why we don’t attach giant balloons to ships to reduce water resistance by cutting down how much of the ship needs to be underwater. Perhaps it’s because you would need more size for the balloon, and maybe the air resistance and water resistance needs to even out due to physical laws and such?

source

Sort:hotnew top

IndustryStandard@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
The boat already floats. What is the point of making it lighter?

If it should fly then get a Zepplin

source
AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Any amount of water contact introduces a fair amount of drag. There may be an ideal point somewhere in the middle, but I think if you take this to it’s natural conclusion you get a zeppelin.

I did a little bit of math and I think that to lift the payload capacity (including fuel and crew) of a modern day Panama canal ship you would need about a tenth of the peak U.S. helium reserve (a cube about half a kilometer long on each edge, about 1.3x longer than the long dimension of the ship)

I don’t think you’d get the best fuel efficiency going upwind lol

Anything smaller would come with proportionally less downsides and at least proportionally less benefits. I doubt it could ever be a net positive in any useful metric.

source
- humanspiral@lemmy.ca ⁨5⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
  Hydrogen for sure. Partial lift for a boat has a lot of applications. Much more cargo than an airship, with no complications in flying empty. A fairly flat triangular “balloon” can be used as a solar platform, a sail, and be put in neutral wind mode down to the deck.
  
  source
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

attach giant balloons to ships

Image

source
Trainguyrom@reddthat.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago
Sounds like you’re vaguely describing a ground effect vehicle, basically a plane which coasts along the water. They’re more efficient than actually flying due to exploiting the ground effect on the lift surfaces, but ultimately it’s closer to a plane than a boat

source