Venus Airships of Rigid Format

( of H2SO4 gathering and subsequent vacuum distillation for obtaining H2O )

by; Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA    updated: November 21, 2003

It's been yet another year since I worked on the considerations for better understanding those Venus rigid airships and, since I've learned just a wee bit more, I've even managed to correct upon some of the math, I thought that we should review upon this aspect from another fresh direction, of having somewhat fewer variables. Use your screen magnifier at 2X in order to frame-in upon just the airship as depicted below, or of the above image.

If a little push comes down to shove, regarding my conservative estimating upon the overall size of this airship, even though I'm using two diagonal pixels worth as a diameter reference, I'll gladly apply those nearly 3 diagonal pixels representing airship diameter as for being 360 meters or even 720 meters worth, thus making the LOA (half to 2/3 showing itself) something like 2400 meters if not 3600 meters, which subsequently computes as rather considerable buoyancy capability (horrific hauling capacity) than what's being proposed. Therefore, I'll certainly accept big as for being a good thing.

It seems most of my most loyal but obviously braille opponents that can only see hot rocks because that's all they seem to know, insisting upon using 225 meters per pixel, and quite naturally speaking that's at least representing a 9 fold overall increase and possibly even more likely 10 fold if you elected to apply those outer most pixel diagonals. So, if you must insist upon your using whatever big as for establishing some pathetic way of disqualifying upon those patterns of what I'm telling you is there to be seen, then be my freaking guest, as besides improving the rigid airship consideration, that makes the bridge issue all that more impressive.

For your pixel reference; a diagonal pixel is worth 1.345 times whatever the elected pixel resolution is specified at, where the diagonal of a 75 m/pixel = 100.875 and, of the more likely raw 94+m/pixel = 126.43, thus even 3 of those diagonal pixels is certainly going to offer nearly 360 meters and, that's still based upon using the most conservative estimates, whereas the following argument is even more so conservatively based upon half that amount and, if you should still not like whatever it is that you can or perhaps can not see, you should realize that you can just stick your opinion where the sun don't shine (I'll even help), as I'm not looking for excuses nor denials, I'm not even claiming this is any WMD, but it certainly could be.

The following isn't intended as rocket science, as the math isn't all that solid, nor are my atmospheric considerations fully developed, but otherwise well enough understood in order to help other village idiots understand that a great deal of rigid airship transportation has been entirely possible, in spite of what the vast majority of what certain prestigious folks have been saying. In other words, they're flat out lying while I'm merely a little inaccurate, though only because the information one needs is either disinformation and/or so intentionally illusive if not downright "nondisclosure" rated, somewhat like learning the truths about our moon.

Venus Metro Airship (using most conservative rigid format):

Diameter: 180 meters (conservative observation/command bulb at 100 meters)
LOA: 1200+ meters (highly conservative, based on 75 meters/pixel)
Construction: basalt composites plus alloy steels such as titanium (10e3 t)
Volume (most conservative estimate including forward bulb): 22.5^6 m3
Propulsion (CO/O2/H2O2/C12H26): 25 to 50 MW (maximum 100 MW)
Machinery: CO/O2 or H2O2/C12H26 turbine engines driving ducted turboprops
Primary Ducted fans (counter rotating) of 150 m.
Thermal environment; 625K as calculated for mid nighttime (720K -50K -9k/km)
Initial Surface Buoyancy: 66+kg/m3
Minimum cruising speed: 50+m/s, above clouds @100+m/s
Buoyancy @ 5 km @625K: 64+kg/m3 (speed: 60+m/s)
Buoyancy @50 km @300K: 1.75+kg/m3 (maximum speed: 150+m/s)
Buoyancy @60 km @0.5 bar @225K: 01.22+kg/m3 (max speed: 225+m/s)
Buoyancy @65 km @0.25 bar @200K: 0.61+kg/m3 (max speed: 250+m/s)

If in fact those cooler nighttime clouds of Venus are pressed sufficiently lower (I've identified research placing nighttime clouds reaching as low as 25 km), then too will the thermal issues become lesser and as a result the pressure greater. If that nighttime environment should drop the 60 km temperature to 200K (normally reserved for the daytime of the 77+km zone) and slightly raise the pressure by 10%, at which point the airship buoyancy becomes 0.76 kg/m3. A further 25% atmospheric pressure shift (0.3125 bar) places the buoyancy at 0.86 kg/m3. A perfectly reasonable high altitude nighttime pressure shift of 50% (0.375 bar) reproduces 1+ kg/m3, which places us right back at obtaining 22,500 t gross buoyancy. Of course I feel that's still a conservative estimate.

Maximum speed estimates are those presumably closely related to surface friction and of the available energy, as whatever total mass has little if anything to do about speed, other than of headway against weather or as for the necessary thrust as for penetrating those thick clouds, where obviously the atmosphere above those cool nighttime clouds (50+km) is sufficiently thin (presumably something under one Bar which is still at least 167 times of greater worth then of anything existing on the deck of the irradiated and frozen to death surface of Mars) as the Venus atmosphere is remaining sufficiently buoyant due to the relatively cooler CO2 content as well as for the lesser gravity then of Earth. Then the somewhat lesser nighttime turbulence of those upper cloud weather patterns is certainly another operational advantage, where the cloud thickness or vertical concentrations may in a few locations drop to a relatively thin 1 km or so, thus selectively offering all that much lesser acidic exposure time.

Only a fool would intentionally cruise within or even near to those acidic clouds (unless intentionally there for extracting H2O), as cruising below is not only relatively calm but absolutely crystal clear and of course modestly warmer, whereas above those cool nighttime clouds, the air (still mostly CO2 but obtaining more O2 percentage) is not only thinner but certainly more akin to being influenced by whatever the daytime induced/circulated influx of somewhat speedy turbulence, which could be quite useful turbulence if it'll blow your airship in the desired (anti-retrograde) direction away from sunrise.

Obviously my math isn't all that perfect (doesn't need to be), and my understanding of physics is that much lesser (again not even a slight factor unless we're trying to establish what a pathetic bastard you are) because, if you're so smart to know something of worth that you're intentionally holding back, that's exactly the why and how the likes of Hitler and the Pope got away with what they did. So, if you feel that my calculations of whatever is somehow insufficient or in error, simply multiply those appropriate factors as to requalify upon whatever the dimensions, then apply those laws of physics that you happen feel are offering the more appropriate calculations. As such a typically qualified critic arguing against anything Venus, surely the photo software and vast observational expertise as to supporting those politically skewed laws of physics, and even for just out of spite entirely rejecting whatever airship technology, as well as for offering superior terminology has got to be a whole lot better off than mine. In other words; your infomercial should more than knock our socks off.

Of course, if you're one of those that must insist this object or raw pixel pattern is of NO airship, but just that of another supposedly common geological rock formation contributed to by some gravity defying and otherwise highly unusual/skewed conventions of tectonics, via cultivated lava flows and artistic erosions that has simply never once been recorded elsewhere, whereas you're offering absolutely no other observational references whatsoever that'll even support your all natural rock arguments, then please do forward whatever you can in order to share those individuals you've gotten your education from, by which your mind is utilizing their expertise in such that your third-hand knowledge is now sufficient as for establishing such items as geological truth, that which apparently only exist on Venus.

In order to help your side of the argument, I'll gladly post all of your support (full context) along with your name so that you'll receive all the credits you deserve. After all, you could be entirely right about all of this and of so many other artificial looking attributes being one of a kind, though of entirely undocumented natural formations, regardless of their looking so unusually artificial, as well as rationally community/infrastructure like. Your superior interpretations alone being the guiding example of firstly excluding upon the artificial aspects by somehow stipulating such items are entirely natural because????, even though you can't prove it nor demonstrate such by the laws of physics nor those of recorded geology. In fact, none of us can actually prove any of the Magellan images are of Venus, thus you could be not only right but establishing these images weren't those of Venus, in other words bogus, as phony as those Apollo moon images that offered so much greater than the 10% reflective index as well as few meteorite strewn debris fields (absolutely none in most of those way too reflective images), as though lunar weather some how turned such meteorites and of their crisp black impact shards of basalt into that infamous clumping moon dirt that for some unexplained reason became so reflective and doesn't clump on Earth.

As of even greater importance may become exactly how in the hell folks like yourself have so profoundly established these patterns (nearly any pixel patterns) as entirely natural, as this alone could certainly be of primo interest to the world of geology-101. I mean, in order to base such profound arguments and summary judgments against the artificial potential, based upon nothing other whatsoever, of referencing upon zero, as in absolutely zilch worth of similar geological observations proven as being anything except artificial, this aspect alone is perhaps of far greater intellectual interest and worth than all of discovering other life on Venus.

The feat of discovering utter stupidity on Earth may become the Holy Grail of all that needs to be known. After all, discovering other life on Venus is nothing as profound as identifying those doing the snookering. At least then we'll know for certain of whom to ignore in the future, like knowing which warlord to ignore about those invisible WMD would have saved humanity way more than a trillion, plus thousands of lives and still counting.

There has always been and still remains a very large inbread or perhaps incest of cloned contingency of those stipulating that I'm simply way short of any actual necessary pixel resolution, as well as lacking in whatever dopamean levels that's been the cause of my neurons misfiring. Actually folks, you and I (even preschoolers) should be able to count nearly three diagonal raw pixels worth related to this airship diameter and, the rest is merely doing whatever math. However, if you should elect to side with those opposing absolutely everything Venus (I'll suppose that would include anything having to do with our moon as well), then please do follow their lead, by merely multiplying those rough measurements and subsequent calculations by another 3X, which by any airship standards of buoyancy is going to 9X upon those total volumes, as this approach is entirely fine and dandy by me, as for whatever size has to do with establishing or not if something is artificial or not has never been understood by this village idiot. Big or bigger yet, those pixel patterns are still most likely representing that of an airship, parked half way out from under that hatch which is clearly attached to that hangar/silo that's clearly constructed so as to be utilizing the underground as safe haven silo.

I'll suppose, all of this could be an honest mistake, as otherwise representing the one and only examples of such unusual geological formations ever recorded, where all we'll need is but one other example plus some new laws of physics, as well as alternative gravity and of skewed planetary geological evolution in order to substantiate such unusual formations as being entirely natural.

Obviously those of the "all knowing" club that's been religious about their pro-NASA divine order, these supposedly nice folks are thoroughly convinced and/or snookered that somehow their insistence upon everything being so much larger has magically disqualified everything as from being the least bit artificial worthy, which I thoroughly believe this is also another good omen because, of all those common mountainous terrain issues of Venus have been something that's also in serious need of being disqualified, as that based upon those very same NASA approved "too big" disqualifying standards, as by my photo enlargement software (all variations of such) seems to have equally distorted those lesser as well as larger patterns of what's most likely natural looking as such objects tend to go, of considerations that others and myself honestly thought were most likely entirely natural and perhaps still are, as oddly those items (perhaps 99.999% of Venus) have remained entirely as natural and as undistorted looking after their enlargement as before, thus obviously there's become some sort of a really big ass problem brewing here, as perhaps the entire planet of Venus can and should be ultimately disqualified, as for simply being too damn big (17+km mountains must be another joke because they're too big), therefore it simply doesn't exist, just like it's gravity doesn't ever affect Earth when parked within a four body alignment of days (actually weeks) on end. At least that's been exactly what my opposition has to say about anything Venus, "it's too big".

Going by way of those absolute avoidance factors of all the pretentious astronomers, of arrogant astrophysics types and even that of Club NOAA for their part in excluding any planetary influence contributions whatsoever upon Earth, as not even when Venus was pulling consistently in the solar direction for weeks on end, that further compounded by being in darn good conjunction with the gravity-well pull of our moon, for at least a couple of days residing within nearly 100 times the distance of our little moon, as for those events being merely coincidental when Earth had some truly and unusually strong tectonics, exceptional tidal and unexplained (lethal) weather considerations, as according to those "all knowing" pro-NASA wizards, Venus of all things represented less worth than of any measurable affects upon Earth. I'll have to guess, that's somewhat like the white dwarf Sirius-B wildly pulling upon the much larger Sirius-A and of those Dogon seemingly knowing all about such things and even having further knowledge of their being Sirius-C along with it's planet(s) or moon(S) are all total freaks of nature, perhaps even freaks of humanity, thus should be excluded from any formal discussions, such as related to why our gravity formulas are still off as why our deep space probes have not traveled their respective distances due to something totally unexplained by Lord NASA, thereby such discrepancies are apparently of no further concern by any mortal humans.

This must explain why there's been absolutely no chance of any oversight of multiple errors by our NASA moderated members regarding Venus, as well as their teams of hybrid radiation-proof astronauts and assorted lunar wizard societies being somehow immune from their making such mistakes, and besides all of that, if NASA/NSA/DoD wish to keep anything under raps, well so be it, that's the end of it (God has spoken, even if that means thousands of captive war prisoners are those vanishing off the face of Earth, while planes and shuttles are being stricken from the air, along with a few others crashing into tall buildings is having nothing whatsoever to do with our policy nor with the reasons for all of the potentially lethal "nondisclosure" enforcement).

You may not be able to tell, I'm trying to not be intentionally disrespectful to truly nice folks however, that sort of white-washing and/or dog-wagging discipline has been getting somewhat harder to take by the month, especially ever since 9/11, so I try as to imply any number of things as through whatever analogies and as associations to what other I know for sure, as those opposing my discoveries and associated research have been treating this village idiot like I'm actually an idiot and, surprisingly I do take offence to that. I've clearly stipulated that I still own at least three working brain cells and, that's obviously three more then those morons that can't see what's been existing in plain sight on the surface of Venus for the past thirteen years, not even after I clearly pointed such items out, as obviously their observational coaches from "Hogan's Heroes" accomplished their damn fine job once again, just like they trained Sgt. Schultz’ and Col. Wilhelm Klink as to seeing, hearing and smelling nothing, absolutely nothing whatsoever.

In spite of all that "Camp Hogan" expertise and exceptionally weird gravity stuff that oddly excludes Venus from using any Earthly equations, there's still remaining those aberrations of what that rather massively structured airship is all about (not even including those craft on the tarmac situated due North of town), of just the one that's sufficiently large (comprised of nearly a dozen pixels) protruding out from under the silo/hanger hatch that's otherwise so well symmetrically associated with it's rather massive horizontal infrastructure (symmetrically geometrical as all holy get out) as for safely housing such a massive airship, all of that being situated near to those two parallel inset groups of relatively large spheres, possibly containing H2 or H2O2 and most likely of other sums of CO and O2. I seem to count at least 8 spheres, plus other nearby circular reservoir considerations as well as some form of power plant or process plant that seems to being connected to the protruding airship, that plant emitting a sufficiently dense emission as to be detected or recorded by the 8 bit 4X look per pixel of SAR imaging radar, that which all of astronomy refuses to believe is even a viable method of observation unless it's seeing only rocks, or otherwise depicting upon purely natural stuff, as then somehow this method of imaging capability is working just fine and dandy.

Of course, this airship is certainly not of the one and only artificial consideration, as I've shared a dozen or more significantly worthwhile considerations that are each more likely artificial then not, at least others nor have I located any alternative SAR imaging (including from thousands taken of Earth) that is comparable in proving otherwise. Again, unlike our NASA, I'll openly accept anything you might have to offer, posting your image examples of unusually formed geological whatever, as well as insuring you the fullest of credits for all of your talents.

Since I'm the guy in charge of this discovery, I've initially elected upon using the most conservative 75 meter per pixel as my measurement reference and, as such I subsequently estimated upon the total airship interior volume of 22.5+ million m3, then I've calculated the maximum buoyancy as for elevated flight, such as cruising just above 5km we're looking at a somewhat cooler nighttime aloft buoyancy capability of obtaining at the very least 62 kg/m3 and, at the extreme other end of the spectrum, I've calculated that the near maximum upper sustainable cruising altitude as that based upon 0.25 bar at 60 km and of the external atmospheric temperature of 225ºK (the H2/N2/O2 cabin interior at 325 K) is perhaps 1 kg/m3. Of any greater altitude would need to off load ballast, apply further heat into the H2 and/or put on some serious speed, all of which I believe is possible and I further believe this airship might even become capable of briefly sustaining 75 km, as perhaps long enough as to accomplish astronomy and/or locate whatever substances and dive back sufficiently below those clouds at preferably some lesser cloud disturbance zone.

1 kg X 22^6 m3 = 22^6 kg or 22,000 metric tonnes buoyancy

If I were to be further rounding things downward (allowing for crew/passenger space as not displaced by H2 but as otherwise by N2/O2), even this places the 60 km buoyancy worth at 20,000 tonnes.

If 75% of that capability were of airframe structural (that's 15,000 tonnes) and of whatever propulsion and CO2--CO/O2 conversion technology and of perhaps a few hundred tonnes of H2O2 boost fuel, that still remains 5,000 tonnes as for those lizard folk crew members, their passengers and of whatever astronomy instruments along with a relatively good allotment as for their gathering whatever cloud content of at least a few thousand tonnes worth of raw H2SO4 (30% sulfuric acid), of which several thousand more tonnes may become needed if they're on their return path to the surface, as additional ballast is required unless they were to substantially compress and/or release all that much of that valuable H2, O2 and/or N2.

H2 is obviously of so little value to us on Earth, however, upon Venus that's more likely worth its weight in gold or perhaps the value of diamonds per kg. So, obviously you don't waste whatever H2, nor H2O or even H2O2. In other words "waste not want not" or else. If those clouds are exactly what others say they are, then the process of H2SO4-->H2O extraction on Venus is sort of a non issue, thereby conversion into H2O2 for safe storage, then into H2 on demand is certainly not of any insurmountable dilemma.

This is from my latest calculation, based upon the airship interior of H2 being the exact same temperature as the nighttime exterior.

BTW; Venus gravity @60 km (90.7% x .9805 = 88.93%) is offering yet another positive buoyancy multiplier factor of: 1.1245

As calculated for 60 km @0.25 Bar & 220 K (reciprocal gravity @1.1245)
H2 = (1.224)(42/29)(.25)(288/225)(40/42) (1.1245) = 0.607 kg/m3
H2 = (1.224)(1.448) (.25)   (1.28)  (.9524) (1.1245)  = 0.607 kg/m3
              N2 buoyancy = 40% that of H2 = 0.256 kg/m3

Boosting lift via the cabin interior should more then place the buoyancy well above .65 kg/m3 (more likely 1.3 kg/m3 if the 60 km exterior is 0.5 bar). After all, these are most likely nocturnal lizard folk and even 325°K is simply not all that warm, at least not so that a 325°K airship interior should be discounted as a likely scenario. If the entire H2 volume were raised by 100K, that alone should help push the buoyancy well over the 1 kg/m3. As soon as others or I can become somewhat more professional about all this calculation, I'll nail this final airship capability down to what's most likely the case.

I do have a number of somewhat older pages that pertain to this airship (Air-Travel and Airship-2 plus a few others involving the use of these machines) and, if you can stand a little more of my poor syntax and numerous unintentional errors along with my continued bad humor, then there may be hope for you as well as humanity after all because, whenever I read through my own old stuff, often I too get thoroughly confused and, that's sort of why I'm doing this page.

BTW; I also believe there are a number of other smaller airships (at least two) resting on the tarmac in the upper main image area, however, because they're significantly smaller (of fewer pixels worth) there's certainly an opportunity for skewed interpretations other then mine. Of course my theory is (has always been), if there's such a motherly massive metro airship within this community, there is bound to be a few smaller craft as for personal needs as well as for the mining and/or cloud substance gathering functions, as those airships need not be constructed for their speed nor range, just of reasonably good altitude and of fairly respectable vertical rates of travel of perhaps 1 km per minute, not that any lizard sort of individual is in any hurry, as these smaller craft could even be robotic, especially since their seasons of nighttime are 2900 hours worth and, even their onset of sunrise is not exactly anything a mother airship couldn't easily outrun (with a little incentive, such as surviving or not, you could damn near walk faster then sunrise).

Under full acceleration of this mother airship is where I'm talking about introducing 50 MW worth of ducted counter rotating fans (possibly a peak demand of 100 MW), I believe this metro airship could obtain a vertical sprint assent of at least 2 km per minute, making for their nighttime (less thick) cloud penetration in as little as 5 minutes. You may need to appreciate that CO/O2 is a relatively good energy combination and, that of supplementing such combustion along with a little H2O2 is certainly not going to hurt and, you must also remember that for much of this airship energy demands of mostly CO/O2 is what's already surrounding them, somewhat like if you were floating about on Earth but in a boat on an ocean comprised of JP5 while otherwise surrounded the 21% worth of O2, so that of the actual onboard fuel and O2 storage requirements are obviously going to be quite minimal. Another issue worth always keeping in mind is for regarding their 91% gravity factor, as that not only allows a far better construction to overall weight ratio but, that lesser gravity also will have another positive affect upon anything that's going up and/or trying to stay aloft, somewhat like what's been benefitting the buoyancy of sustaining those H2O loaded cool nighttime clouds, floating quite nicely atop all of that crystal clear ocean of mostly CO2.

Taking the 91% gravity factor into account is either going to positively affect the actual lifting capacity factor in a very positive way or, it will adjust the buoyancy calculation of whatever H2 by the same factor of 1.099  Either way this accomplishes the very same desirable outcome, including much better rates of accent. Without my getting melodramatic, that's certainly another win-win-win as for the rigid airship technology of Venus.

Sorry folks;  it seems as though in spite of my unintentional math and syntax errors, that of whatever I may lack in science, physics and perhaps even a serious load of common sense have still been slanting the truth towards my side of the fence, while the immoral considerations on the side of my opposition are those of truly despicable acts of simple greed, power and/or ego, plus packing a serious load of absolute arrogance and of utter dishonesty on just about every front (skewing their science as well as their physics in order to suit whatever the politically correct situation at hand). Other then all of that; our NASA as well as for their dominate cloak and dagger mates of NSA/DoD must have been really great institutions of perpetrating the utmost skewed science, skewed physics and of dispensing disinformation, where that's certainly not all bad if you're the one that's intentionally perpetrating those cold-wars, otherwise attempting to rule the world the way only you see fit. As in spite of whatever the public opinion and/or body counts, you've obviously got to do whatever it takes, it is simply what you've got to do, especially from those not sufficiently smart enough to honestly accomplish much of anything benefiting humanity on their own.
To my INDEX page: GUTH Venus (with loads of other updates)
Alternate URL's:  and
Copyright © 2000/2001/2002/2003 - Brad E. Guth
GUTH Venus: All Rights Reserved
Webmaster: Brad Guth - Brad Guth / IEIS   ~  1-253-8576061
created: January 17, 2003

Brad Guth / IEIS