4 replies
March 25

Raf

Looks like this isn’t about competing with F-35s. It’s about next-gen logistics and eyes-in-the-sky platforms that could support special ops, surveillance, or remote base resupply with minimal footprint. I like.

1 reply
March 26 ▶ Raf

Arthur_Foyt

Military “logistics” favor that all vehicles use the same fuel for all vehicles.
Think about it, hauling in special generators and special process systems and special pumps and specialized oxygen storage facilities into a war zone is nuts. What’s funny is that hauling in all the fuel to just run the generators is less efficient than just putting it directly into a normal aircraft! Madness.

1 reply
March 26

JoeDB

Hydrogen as a fuel is silly, it takes a lot of energy to make it and it leaks through fittings that no other gas does. Commercial hydrogen is frequently made by cracking methane (natural gas). Way easier and cheaper to just use natural gas as fuel. BWI airport even sells it for the win!

March 26 ▶ Arthur_Foyt

Raf

Arthur, you are correct about conventional military operations. Fuel uniformity with JP-8 makes sense, it is exactly why NATO adopted JP-8 as the single battlefield fuel to simplify logistics. But for small, stealthy forward systems, hydrogen could reduce resupply risk if it is produced onsite.

As for commercial aviation, in case you may want to go there, it is a far stretch — the cost, complexity, and safety risks make it more of a liability than a solution.