OneQ50 - Continuous Foam Operations at Major Fire Incidents

It’s strange how an incident in a far off land can trigger a response in you. However, such an incident for me was the overrun of Air France Flight 358 at Toronto in Canada on the 2nd of August 2005. The very next morning found myself and fellow Senior Fire Commander Dean Hawkins standing in the mangroves at the southern end of an international airport runway doing the “what ifs” of a nasty aircraft overrun and testing our consciences’ with the benefit of theoretical hindsight.

It seems then, as it does now, that an incident in areas such as these is going to be a toughie; given inaccessibility, lack of immediate reticulated water supply, difficult terrain and other elements that could be learned from incidents such as Flight 358.

The raw news footage of ARFF vehicles operating and then apparently withdrawing to replenish is typical of accepted doctrine and let’s face it, if there’s nothing else in place, it’s the only way we can really do it under the circumstances. ARFF operations on the Flight 358 fireground were reminiscent – to me at least - of the huge Coode Island Chemical Fire in Melbourne, at which ARFF vehicles were forced to use the same tactic of withdrawal / replenishment / re-attack and then try to regain what progress had been lost during the withdrawal / replenishment / re-attack process. That’s BEFORE you can make any further process. Is there not at least one other (better) way, that also reduces time on the fireground?

That (better) way would allow us to use at least one ARFF Tender in static mode in continuous foaming operations and remove the need to withdraw / replenish / re-attack. Ah, life is sweet in a utopian world….. Having now set the scene, allow me to digress.

The Rosenbauer Panther is an excellent machine especially in the hands of dedicated, competent and keen crews. The Panther monitor can discharge at 80 L/sec (100%) or 40 L/sec (50%) at the flick of a switch on the monitor “joystick” – this feature will become important later….

Over run area pre-planning had already revealed that monitor throw was sufficient to reach the opposite bank of the tidal creek, but how long could monitor discharge (“Q”) be sustained if only one vehicle was within or could get within, monitor range? With these prospective operational issues firmly identified it was time for the pragmatic neurons to start communicating – we knew what the problem was, how could we solve or mitigate it?

It was discovered earlier in 2005 soon after we took local delivery of the first Panther that we could induct directly into the pump proportioner from an external foam source, and trials were conducted to gain enough information for practical use. Our previous vehicles did not have this capability - nor do we use compound gauges.

This was exciting news it meant that if we could keep the water supply up, we could run the monitor at 100% Q for extended periods; no longer needing to stop discharge & withdraw to top up foam & also eliminated the time taken to fill the foam tank. It provides the ability to use different foams without contaminating ARFF foam already stored in the vehicle tank. The benefits are truly very operationally significant.

Without a little lateral thinking though, the fill rate of the Panther - using both its BIC (British Instantaneous Coupling) male couplings - would remain at approx. 40 L/Sec. Not enough for continuous monitor operations. Was there a way of increasing the fill rate? A single BIC coupling is rated upto 40L/sec throughput. We were just over half that, so the good news was there was plenty of room to improve!!.

Given the potential throughput of the BIC filler coupling, what if we could get some sort of collector head into which could be connected 2 x 64mm hoses. What then? Many services use / used “collector heads” or “dividing breaches” to manage water flows, ARFF in our case doesn’t. So I phoned one of the many professionals at the local brigade who loaned me an old dividing breach to try – alas there was only a very marginal improvement in flow.

We thought, “maybe the design is not optimal, perhaps if we increase the angle to a sharp “Y”, increased the diameter of the collector to match that of the internal piping within the Panther and welded the couplings such as there was no restriction to flow?” Thus our “Y” was born and provided a fill rate under optimal conditions of 35 L/sec. With a “Y” in both fillers we could achieve a fill rate of 70 L/sec – it wasn’t going to get much better than that. Welcome to the “Y” generation!

And thereby… OneQ50 was able to develop. We could apply One hundred percent monitor discharge (“Q”) until the water supply fell and then switch to 50 percent monitor discharge (40L/sec). Despite continuous monitor operations we could still build up our internal water tank supply (@ 1800 L/min) whilst consolidating our hard won gains. We can then switch back to 100% Q and make further gains and so on. We maintain continuous monitor operations with 6% AFFF.

Even using the “Y” for rapid replenishment of a Tender, let alone continuous monitor operations, saves about 3 minutes in refill time. Three minutes is a long time in our line of work! The cost of two “Y’s”, less than $1,000 Aus – 3 parts of bugger all…

The concept of OneQ50 had a flow on effect to operational flexibility. Instead of (the traditional approach) of storing thousands of litres of AFFF in a single fixed storage tank, complemented by 200 litre drums back at the station, it allowed removal of that storage tank and a transition to solely 1000L totes. I now had a valuable – but flexible - resource of foam not bolted to the ground, but able to be deployed anywhere…. What other risks are there in your area of operations that would best be tackled by OneQ50? What other scenarios could we use OneQ50 in to garner maximum operational benefit? What about those airport fuel farms? Wouldn’t it be comforting if we could pre-incident plan exactly how much equipment and consumables are needed to extinguish a particular tank fire and when our “stop time” could occur? It’s always nice to be home for tea on time!

OneQ50 fits this niche quite nicely, thank you very much. In the OneQ50 example using the Panther we need to develop some figures to add to our pre-incident planning in a methodical and pragmatic way.

In Table A: Each column displays the total volume remaining at that given time eg. Column one the first 30 seconds of operation @ 100% using 6% foam while refilling using a vehicle at 40 L/s would result in a remaining total of 7844 L of water (8900L – 2256L expelled + 1200L refill = 7844L remaining) and a total 1196 L of foam remaining (1340L – 144L expelled = 1196L).

If you have a mind to develop the figures a little further you can draw out some fairly startling ones… Now just how much room is left in the fuel tank and what is the capacity of the bund around that fuel farm???

- At 100% Q over 5 minutes you produce 22560L of aspirated AFFF, covering 1550 square metres @ critical application rate (5.5l/s per m square).

- Continuous Ops at 100% with no refill will last 1min 58 secs, covering 613M square @ critical application rate.

- Mk8 will use over 17,000 litres of foam in continuous 6% Ops at 100% monitor Q every hour… That’s a lot of AFFF, how much have you got against your risk versus operational practices??

If you can’t put a blaze out using a sound theoretical calculation, you’ll be hard pressed to put it out. Having said that, “issues” on the day like access, weather and fire conditions, may make life difficult or death easy. However, we must have a place to start from and we don’t want to be expending vital agent to find things out we should have or could have already known.

With a Category 9 airport with the ICAO minimum of 3 ARFF Tenders in a line, using a OneQ50 process and pumping into each other, the third one will run out first. It’s then away to refill or can be replaced by a 4th to maintain water. Local assistance can also plug in to one of four inlets, although their bulk water will probably be significantly less.

You can pump 6% (not yet aspirated) AFFF it tends to be a tad messy – but when it’s “hit the fan” who really cares? You don’t have to relay pump 6% you can just do external foam fill at the last vehicle before the Q vehicle. Saves mess, easier to manage (one refill point) and if you get stuck with low foam where you are inducting it, you can always pump 6% from the vehicles “further behind”. OneQ50 is a practical, low cost, quick get to work method of continuous foam application from a vehicle monitor.

Before you experiment with very expensive pieces of equipment though, have a chat with your fleet engineer to avoid things like over pressurising tanks (we had to leave one lid open during trials). Next time you order a Tender get four inlets built in and a lid that will allow any inflow pressure to be relieved and not crack the tank.

OneQ50 is not currently an ARFF tactic in Australia.

Finally, if your call is to an aircraft in difficult terrain and access is a temporarily insurmountable problem, at least you know it only takes 10 minutes to get HELIFOAM into action…..

Joe Murrell (This paper was published in the Aviation Fire Journal in 2008)

FUEL FOR THOUGHT … Aviation Rescue Fire Fighting and the coming cryoplane revolution

The aim of this paper is to apply current Aviation Rescue Fire Fighting (ARFF) tactics against an aircraft fuelled with liquid hydrogen (LH2).

This paper was originally published in 2008 in the Aviation Fire Journal and the PDF is attached below.

ARFF for Cryoplanes

.pdf

Download PDF • 909KB

The demand for commercial jet travel has never been greater than it is now. Aircraft such as the soon to be introduced double deck Airbus A380 powered by aviation turbine fuel, are carrying greater loads over longer distances than ever before. This paper will explore the environmental impact of aviation turbine fuel and why liquid hydrogen is a viable alternative. Furthermore, it will also explore the efficacy of Aviation Rescue Fire Fighting tactics applied to an aircraft fuelled by liquid hydrogen. The need for an Aviation Turbine (AvTur) replacement

In the coming decades, the adverse environmental impact of aviation will become such that an increasingly powerful influence on aircraft design is unavoidable. Environmental impacts will progressively restrict the growth of aviation, except if the adverse impact per passenger kilometre can be significantly abridged as compared to today’s levels (Green 2003) (NASA Glenn Research Center 2002).

Turbine engines produce, amongst other gases, carbon dioxide (CO2). CO2 is a greenhouse gas that most significantly remains in the atmosphere for 50-100 years. The only other emission gas remaining in the atmosphere for a time measured in years is Methane, (8-10 years). The remaining greenhouse gases have lives in the atmosphere measured only in days, weeks or months (Green 2003).

The position of causing burgeoning pollution that the aviation industry

currently finds itself in, is similar in many ways to the position that the car

manufacturing sector found itself in, in the early 80’s. The solution then, as it is now,

is related to fuel (Shauck & Zanin 2002).

In addition to the environmental issue, the issue of dwindling world oil

reserves is also paramount. In 2003, the University of Utah calculated the weight of

pre-historic plant matter that was required to produce all the fossil fuels used in 1997.

The figure arrived at was a staggering 44 million billion tonnes. This figure in 2003

terms, equated to 22 percent of all plants then on the planet (University of Utah 2003).

The eleven nations that comprise OPEC, (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries), aver they can supply oil for the worlds needs for the next 80 years. OPEC currently supplies approx. 40% of the earth’s oil and controls approx. 60% of world reserves. By 2010, Russia is expected to be the 2nd major world oil supplier behind OPEC, with China and Kazakhstan also rising as the major suppliers. Interestingly, world oil production is yet to peak, (Cetron & Davies 2006).

Technological advances have brought to light a new type of aeroplane, known as a cryoplane, that may resolve the environmental and non-renewable resource conundrums. A cryoplane is an aircraft that uses a liquid fuel whose fuel temperature is kept below minus 73 degrees C (College of the Desert 2001). In this case, the fuel is Liquid Hydrogen.

Why Liquid Hydrogen (LH2) ?

Some considerable research effort has already been expended into the blending of AvTur with renewable fuels. This research consists of essentially diluting AvTur with less environmentally damaging fuels such as Biodiesel, Alcohol and even liquefied Bio-methane at percentages of up to 25% renewable fuels. Fuels such as variants of Biodiesel, AvTur itself (Kerosene IGT & TPS), and even Biomass produced hydrogen, still produce CO2 emissions when burnt (Saynor & Bauen & Leach 2003). Notwithstanding, “dilutions” can produce significant CO2 emission benefits with no discernable losses in engine power or economy, at equivalent cost (Shauck & Zanin 2002). However, such blends are not intended as replacements, only emission reducing agents.

If the primary driver of a replacement fuel for AvTur is elimination of CO2 emissions altogether, then Liquid Hydrogen (LH2) generated by renewable resources such as hydroelectricity is currently, the only answer. An adoption of aircraft fuelled by liquid hydrogen is technically feasible and would substantially decrease the adverse impact on the environment by the aviation industry (Birkenstock 1998) (European Commission 2002) (Saynor & Bauen & Leach 2003). The USA gave LH2 its first aviation test by powering one engine of a modified Canberra bomber in 1956 (Birkenstock 1998).

Properties of Liquid Hydrogen (LH2)

Hydrogen is colourless, odourless, flammable and tasteless, and is the most abundant element in the universe (Schmidtchen 2003). Scenting agents such as thiophanes and mercaptans may not be used to add aroma, as they will poison hydrogen fuel cells. A flow of hydrogen from a leak even during daylight, is almost invisible and in a confined area, diminutive leaks only create a diminutive threat of asphyxiation, but may pose a fire risk (College of the Desert 2001).

However, substantial leaks can create a substantial threat since hydrogen diffuses quickly to fill the volume within a confined area. Inhaled Hydrogen can produce a flammable mixture inside the lungs and may also cause loss of consciousness and asphyxiation (College of the Desert 2001).

In comparison with AvTur, LH2 produces 3 times the energy but requires 4 times the volume per kilo of fuel. However, as LH2 is less dense (x 2.6 times) it retains an efficiency advantage over Avtur. Conversely, this reduced volumetric density means that a larger fuel tank is required. In an aviation application, given also that it needs to be stored cold at pressure, current technology dictates that a spherical or cylindrical tank is required (Birkenstock 1998) (Saynor & Bauen & Leach 2003). This requirement means existing designs will require modifications to use LH2 and new designs need to include this requisite (Saynor & Bauen & Leach 2003). Hydrogen has a wider flammability range than AvTur. Notwithstanding that, Hydrogen fires will consume themselves much more rapidly than kerosene (AvTur) fires, making them comparatively ephemeral. Explosive mixtures of hydrogen are easily achieved in enclosed areas, but achieving explosive mixtures in open areas, is almost impossible (Saynor & Bauen & Leach 2003) (Birkenstock 1998). Liquid Hydrogen expands 848 times by volume when transitioning from a liquid to a gas (College of the Desert 2001).

As a general rule, gases can be liquefied by reducing their temperature, a process called liquefaction. Correspondingly, Hydrogen has the second lowest boiling point of all substances (minus 253 degrees C). To reduce the amount of cooling required to achieve liquefaction, pressure may be applied and in the case of hydrogen, up to 1300 KPA can be applied, above which, no further benefit to liquefaction occurs. As a result of such pressure, the boiling point is raised to minus 240 degrees C (College of the Desert 2001). In addition, hydrogen is difficult to contain due to its molecular size which allows it to permeate containers usually considered airtight or impermeable. When liquid hydrogen is exposed to the atmosphere is evaporates very quickly due to its low boiling point and becomes buoyant, raising in the atmosphere due to its low density in comparison to normal air. Conversely, AvTur spreads laterally when liberated from a container and evaporates slowly and during this period, fire risks will exist. The products of Hydrogen combustion are non-toxic, in contrast with AvTur which generates black toxic smoke (College of the Desert 2001). Timelines for change

Airbus estimates as a result of its “Cryoplane” project which concluded in 2003, that full cryoplane technology could be expected in 15-20 years at the earliest (Airbus Deutschland GmbH 2003). Airbus in conjunction with GE Motors (General Electric), plans to test a cryogenic fuel cell in the hold of an A320 aircraft (the Airbus equivalent of a Boeing 737), mid 2007. Similarly, Boeing intends to install a 440W cryogenic fuel cell APU (Auxiliary Power Unit), to power a demonstration aircraft later this year and has been conducting fuel-cell research in Spain since 2003 (Fuel Cell Today 2006).

These estimates and forecasts gel well with other estimates that consider growing world energy needs. It is estimated that world energy needs will increase 40% over year 2000 requirements, to nearly 290 millions barrels of oil-equivalent energy per day, disregarding further efficiencies and conservation measures put into place (Collier 2004). Similarly, the European Commission’s position is that the conversion to sustainable fuels is unavoidable and may well commence as early as 2015 (European Commission 2002). Aviation Rescue Fire Fighting (ARFF) tactics

The review method is to apply current equipment and practices as if a cryoplane had miraculously appeared today and required some form of ARFF intervention. ARFF tactics are derived from a strategy to; “Create conditions under which rescue operations can be mounted”. To achieve this strategy, ARFF tactics are; “The correct deployment of vehicles, personnel and equipment to achieve the strategic plan, having regard to wind, terrain, aircraft type, manning, and vehicles” (ARFF 2006a). Liquid Hydrogen (LH2) Leaks

Wind may affect the ability of LH2 to rise once released. The figure below shows

a comparison between Liquid Hydrogen, Methane and Propane. The quantity of LH2

spilled is 3,000 litres, the equivalent of 1% of the quantity of gas normally carried by

Hindenburg. This spill though still significant and in a wind of approx. 16km/ph,

corresponds to a LH2 downwind danger far reduced from that of Propane - which is

heavier than air.

The possibility that a fully fuelled cryoplane had been on the ground for

sufficient time to allow hydrogen to gasify in its fuel tanks, and thereby raise internal

fuel tank pressure cannot be discounted. This would be dealt with automatically using

a safety valve on the vertical tail to facilitate a controlled release (Birkenstock 1998).

If there were safety concerns with nearby structures, ARFF could provide a (limited

benefit given LH2 behaviour) water curtain, as shown below.

ARFF could expect to see something similar to the below effects for a LH2 release from the highest point atop a cryoplane empennage.

Release experiment at a model tank for liquid hydrogen on the BAM test ground at Horstwalde, (Germany). The white fogs consist of air moisture condensed by very cold hydrogen gas (above the tank) and liquefied air (on ground) occurring as a by-product (Schmidtchen 2003). Photo: BAM, Gollner

In the event that H2 was physically prevented from raising and dispersing, current high pressure (low flow) hose reels could be used where appropriate. In a confined space, positive pressure fans to ventilate affected structures or aircraft could be applied. Current gas detection equipment should be reviewed in the interim to ensure that the LEL (Lower Explosive Limit) warning function is totally appropriate to Hydrogen detection. Furthermore, a hydrogen HEL (Higher Explosive Limit) function should also be included (AFFM 2006b).

In the event of an emergency where an aircraft has to return to the field shortly, or immediately after take off, LH2 may also have an advantage. The MTOW (Maximum Take Off Weight) of the aircraft may well exceed the weight at which it is permitted to land (Getline 2005). Existing aircraft have height and in some cases area restrictions (not over city and suburbs) as to when they can “dump” fuel. This ensures AvTur has time to evaporate and not pose a hazard. LH2 may well eliminate this requirement and add to the safety of an abnormal landing, where the dumping of fuel is desirable for reasons such as outlined. Current jet aircraft if exposed to sufficient damage or malfunction of their fuel systems including their tanks, could result in AvTur leaking. Gravity will cause fuel to find its way to a lowest point. If an opening exists to the outside world, then that fuel will flow and pool on the ground. Depending on the fuel type, weather & topographical considerations, that fuel may remain pooled for minutes, hours, days, weeks or even months (ARFF 2006b). This is quite contrary to physical properties of LH2.

Aircraft such as the Boeing 787 and the Airbus A350 are to be introduced to service within the next 3 years. Both these new aircraft are more “electrified” than previously and are planned to set the standard for future aircraft. That is, they will have electrically operated components superseding pneumatic components to save weight and provide greater and easier serviceability (Norris et al 2005). It is assumed that such electrification will not provide additional sources of ignition.

Liquid Hydrogen (LH2) Fires

The current practice of creating and maintaining a rescue path by laying foam (monitor or handlines), to cover the evacuation area and allow passengers to escape will not become obsolete, but an appreciation of the physical properties of LH2 needs to be gained.

It can be fairly argued that gravity, influences actions to be taken and as such equipment, training and extinguishing agents target this phenomenon. The principle extinguishing method of foam is by smothering the fire. This largely requires existing aircraft fuels to lay in an area where this can be accomplished. If this is not completely the case then secondary agents such as DCP (Dry Chemical Powder) or CO2 (Carbon Dioxide) can be applied (ARFF 2006b).

The aforementioned mainly includes considerations for the control of the primary fire. An aviation fire fighting issue in any event, is that a primary fire may cause secondary fires of the aircraft itself, or exposures (ARFF 2006b).

The Hindenberg took just 60 seconds from ignition to burn the equivalent of 235,000 litres of LH2 (Wikipedia 2006) which, if taken as typical, seems to set a largely unachievable, no notice, ARFF response time. Current response time requirements are from time of notification to time of first effective intervention is no more than 3 minutes to the end of any runway (ARFF 2006a). A study of the LH2 response time issue would perhaps benefit from using the Hindenburg fire as a case study.

Given the short time frames of hydrogen burn off, it appears prima facie that ARFF may have to consider more specific targeting of the implications of a flash fire rather than focusing on primary ground based fire control. In particular, the secondary consequences may include flash or radiated hydrogen burns to passengers, crew or others. In practical terms, it should evolve that ARFF carries large quantities of the latest in burns treatments.

The above photographs impart a very graphic depiction of the fire behaviour

differences between AvTur and liberated H2 gas. The volume of liberated H2

involved is approx. the same as could be expected to be carried in a large four engined

aircraft in LH2 form. In the case of the Hindenburg, it is supposed there would have

been little even modern ARFF crews could have done to intervene during the free

burning phase. Conversely in the DC10 photograph, as a result of a fast response time and fighting an AvTur fire with conventional equipment and conventional agents, direct ARFF intervention saved lives (ARFF 2006a).

It is interesting to juxtapose if this DC10 had been fuelled by LH2 instead of AvTur, then the fire would have then existed in about the orange area above the jet, instead of the area on the ground where the fire is shown. This, and similar incidents may also be worthy of further study on such comparative grounds. Conclusion

Of the need to replace AvTur the evidence is clear on environmental and fossil fuel reserve grounds. Such evidence has been building for a number of years and is becoming ever more prevalent and valid. Of the need to replace AvTur with an environmentally renewable fuel, there too is clear evidence, and we may see the initial introduction of LH2 within the next 20 years. LH2 is the only fuel available that can meet both the performance requirements of the aviation industry and the environmental needs of the planet.

There are a number of ARFF tactical considerations in relation to LH2 powered cryoplanes, and indeed the wider use of this highly flammable but environmentally friendly and limitless fuel supply. This paper has outlined ARFF tactics for dealing with LH2, however, by its very nature, it inexorably broadens the subject scope such that more specific investigation is required. Recommendations

1. An international ARFF working group be formed with all stakeholders, especially cryoplane manufacturers to establish and where possible meet, the needs of all concerned including:

➢ Equipment (IE, Gas detection equipment, Positive Pressure fans, Thermal Imaging)

➢ Tactics

➢ Training of responders and the public

➢ Response times

➢ Burns treatment technologies

2. The Hindenburg fire be examined from an ARFF perspective to see if beneficial information can be extracted, (IE. Types of injuries, propagation etc.)

3. Aircraft incidents involving major fires be examined, to determine likely outcomes had LH2 been the fuel rather than AvTur. References

Airbus Deutschland GmbH 2003. ‘Liquid Hydrogen Fuelled Aircraft – System Analysis’ Final Technical Report. Project funded by the European Community under the ‘Competitive and Sustainable Growth” program 1998-2002

ARFF 2006a. Aviation Fire Fighting Technical Manual. Available Airservices Australia intranet [online] http://avnet/g1/arff/vol4.asp

ARFF 2006b. Aviation Fire Fighting Reference Manual. Available Airservices Australia intranet [online]

http://avnet/g1/arff/vol5.asp

Birkenstock, W 1998. Hydrogen Aircraft Fuel Research Plans. [online]

http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRheft/FRH9809/FR9809k.htm

Cetron,MI, Davies,O 2006. ‘Trends Now Shaping the Future – Economic, Societal, and Environmental Trends’, The Futurist, March-April p.38.

College of the Desert, 2001. Module 1: Hydrogen Properties, Rev 0, Hydrogen Fuel Cell Engines and Related Technologies. pp. 1-25.

Collier, MA 2004. The Next 100 Years. [online] http://www.astm.org/SNEWS/JUNE_2004/collier1_jun04.html

European Commission 2002. Meeting the Challenges In Aircraft Emissions: Commission Looks Into Clean Alternatives To Fossil Fuel. [online] http://www.jrc.cec.eu.int/download/press/releases/cryoplane.pdf

Fuel Cell Today 2006. [online]

http://www.fuelcelltoday.com/FuelCellToday/IndustryInformation/IndustryInformationExternal/NewsDisplayArticle/0,1602,7626,00.html

Getline, M 2005. Ask the Captain [online]

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/columnist/getline/2005-01-10-ask-the-captain_x.htm

Green, JE 2003, ‘Greener by Design’ in Proceedings of the AAC-Conference, Friedrichshafen, Germany, pp 334-342.

NASA Glenn Research Center 2002. Zero CO2 Research Project – Project Objectives. [online] http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/AERO/base/zero.htm Norris,G, Thomas,G, Wagner,M, Forbes Smith,C, 2005. Boeing 787 Dreamliner – flying redefined, 1st edition, Aerospace Technical Publications International Pty Ltd, Perth WA.

Saynor,B, Bauen,A, Leach,M 2003. The potential for Renewable Energy Sources in Aviation. Imperial College Centre for Energy Policy and Technology. [online] http://www.iccept.ic.ac.uk

Schmidtchen, U 2003. Liquid Storage of Hydrogen – Status and Outlook. Federal Institute of Material Research and Testing (BAM) Berlin.

Shauck,ME, Zanin,MG 2002 ‘The present and future potential of biomass fuels in aviation’ Renewable Aviation Fuels Development Centre, Baylor University Waco Texas.

University of Utah 2003. What’s new at the U - Bad Mileage: 98 Tons of Plants per Gallon [online] http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=031006-21

Wikipedia 2006. [online]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindenburg_disaster

Meet inventor Hedy Lamarr – The brilliant woman responsible for giving us Wi-Fi

Today, Wi-Fi is ubiquitous. It’s a technology used by billions of people every single day and has allowed for the emergence of entirely new industries. The benefits of Wi-Fi are legend, and have become an integral, some would say inseparable and essential, part of modern life. Yet, few of us ever pause to wonder where it came from. Who came up with the basic idea behind Wi-Fi and how did the concept even start?

To answer these questions, we need to turn to the life of a World War II-era Hollywood actress and inventor, born Hedwig Eva Maria Kiesler in Vienna, but who, on the eve of the Second World War, would become known as Hedy Lamarr.

Who Was Hedy Lamarr?

Before we get into how this amazing person you have probably never heard of came up with Wi-Fi, we should take a look at who she was. Back in 1990, a decade before she died, she remarked how, “The brains of people are more interesting than the looks, I think.” As someone who was a world renown beauty herself, indeed, widely proclaimed as “the world’s most beautiful woman,” the stereotypical thinking of the day was Hedy was just another gorgeous Hollywood actress during the WWII era. Yet, she was probably smarter than many of us.

Hedy was born to Jewish parents in Austria in 1914. She married early, when just 19, to one of the richest men in that country, a wealthy munitions manufacturer, well connected to fascist Italy and a (temporary) supporter of Nazi Germany. Unhappy and unfulfilled in this marriage, she escaped in the middle of the night with typical forethought and daring, taking all her jewels, and dressed as a maid on a bicycle.

Shortly before World War II broke out, Hedy left for the United States aboard, ironically for an inventor, the most powerful steam turbo-electric-propelled passenger ship ever constructed, the transatlantic superliner, the French built Normandie. Even before arriving in New York, and again with typical forethought and daring, she was unavoidably spotted by the head of MGM Studio at the time, Louis B. Mayer. Despite knowing very little English, she negotiated a contract, ($US500 a week in 1939 - worth $US9528 a week in 2021), that would cement her future as a Hollywood actress.

It wasn’t long before she got comfortable in Hollywood, socialising with other renowned actors and actresses, as well as notable figures like John F. Kennedy and Howard Hughes. It was the latter who gave her equipment she then used for various experiments she conducted in her trailer, between going on camera. Her true passion was inventing while thinking outside the box.

Shifting Her Focus To Inventing

This star of movies such as Algiers, and Sampson & Delilah, simply loved inventing. Hedy once remarked how she didn’t even need to work on brainstorming ideas, they just came naturally to her. She was no stranger to hard work either, starring in 30 feature films in just 28 years, in addition to television and radio appearances.

However, despite her acting skills, when it came to negotiations that would ensure she received fair compensation for her inventions, Hedy was not so successful for a number of reasons. Most notably that which gave her most success, her gender. For example, the patent she filed with her “frequency hopping” co-inventor, George Antheil, took decades to bear any financial fruit. What eventually became a multi-national, multi-billion-dollar Wi-Fi and mobile phone industry, was originally conceived to create frequency agile communications and torpedo guidance systems in the war against the Nazis. However, “frequency hopping” gave nothing back to Hedy, not even recognition, until 1997. By this time, she was 82 years old and would only live, in virtual seclusion, for another 3 years.

Hedy rightly found it challenging not receiving due recognition for her tremendous contributions, receiving little press in the 1940s. What most people, Howard Hughes not among them, wanted her to focus on, was being a glamorous Hollywood actress, gracing the big screen.

Louis B. Mayer, who originally negotiated her contract on the Normandie, was a misogynist,

something all too common in those days. For him, women were either one of two things: seductive or put on a pedestal to be admired from far away. When it came down to it, Mayer saw Lamarr as someone who was supposed to just be pretty and sexy on camera. In reality, she was so much more.

The Inspiration To Become An Inventor

Let’s go back a little to set the scene in the world two years after Hedy Lamarr boarded the

transatlantic liner where she met Mayer. In 1940, the Nazis were using U-boats to sink hundreds of thousands of tonnes of shipping in the Atlantic Ocean. They were torpedoing ships, in unrestricted warfare, and with little opposition, in the undersea raiders first, “Happy time.” Often, and with tragic irony, women and children fleeing the Nazis, were aboard these ships. As a woman who was born in the home country of the German dictator Adolf Hitler, and who saw his political rise, Lamarr knew something of this plight and the desperation which caused people to find themselves on a ship.

While Hedy was married to the arms manufacturer Fritz Mendl, she learned everything she

could from him when it came to top-secret weapons systems. The topics absolutely fascinated her. As she saw the Nazis increasing their power in Europe, Hedy made the prudent decision to leave her marriage with Mendl, and her native Austria. She escaped, and set sail for the New World, ensuring her financial future during her travels.

How Hedy Lamarr Invented Wi-Fi

The path to inventing “frequency hopping” for Hedy started back early in WWII. She and George Antheil, a music composer she met at MGM Studios developed a practical idea to provide a new radio guidance system for US torpedoes, one which would be exceedingly difficult to jam electronically. What they would create became known as the “Secret Communication System”.

The original subsequently patented idea was a synchronised radio transmitting and receiving process that would continually change radio frequencies. This would make it extremely difficult for an enemy to listen out for, copy down, then decode the complete message as transmitted.

The same system could have been adapted for use by US torpedoes, to provide a secure method of guidance, unlikely to be jammed, and allowing the “tin fish” to be course corrected if required during its run into the target. Up to this time, US Mark 14 torpedoes were fire and forget, speeding towards their target at 46 knots. They had no means of control once they left the torpedo tube. If the aiming point was wrong, they would miss their target. Thus, a frequency hopping (FH) radio-controlled torpedo would have been more accurate, reaching a target without interference. There’s little doubt of the real potential torpedo FH radio control had to send more enemy shipping to Davy Jones’ locker and help win the war for the Allies.

To develop the original radio system, she had a drafting table, good lighting, and a set of important tools. Being self-taught meant she had to read a vast number of engineering reference books to invent her Secret Communication System. In fact, she had an entire wall lined with books to help her in this endeavour.

While Lamarr and Antheil were partners in developing their invention, Lamar was the real

brains behind it. Thanks to her extensive understanding of technical issues such as munitions, the Secret Communications System was made possible. Hedy Lamarr filed a patent for this invention in 1942, after which she proposed the US Navy adopt it. She could not have known the US Navy’s deepest secret at the time, their torpedoes didn’t work properly and hadn’t since the early 1930s!

If you thought the US Navy would have welcomed the Secret Communication System

with open arms, then you would be disappointed. They refused it for reasons that now seem

ridiculous. For one, they disregarded it due to being invented by a civilian, a woman no less, who could better serve her new country, in an Admirals opinion at least, by selling war bonds.

Additionally, they perceived it as being too complex and futuristic - apparently, they weren’t familiar with the intricate workings of a German Enigma cypher machine… Hedy maintained her contract as a Hollywood actress and explored other ways she could help the US win the war. One of those resulted in her working for the United Service Organisations (USO).

The Female Animal in 1958 marked the end of her film career in Hollywood, but her revolutionary invention finally began to interest people in high places. Around this time, the concept of the Secret Communication System finally started to be adopted by the private sector via CDMA network technology being developed. Code Division Multiple Access, is one of two original systems used for mobile (cell) phones. CDMA and GSM (Global System for Mobiles) both introduced 2G and 3G technology.

In the early 1960s, the US Navy finally took a serious look at Hedy’s invention, using it around the time the Cuban Missile Crisis occurred. However, its use would become most well-known through its help in the development of two wireless technologies: Bluetooth and Wi-Fi.

Recognition Received Only Decades Later

Sadly, Hedy would seldom be recognised for her immense contributions to the digital age. She had to watch other inventors pushing their “frequency hopping” inventions and see them take off. In fact, those who came after her had their own contributions to advance Wi-Fi technology to a place she could never have dreamed of.

Currently, frequency hopping is widespread, especially in mobile phones, as well as GPS and super secure military communication systems. Its use has blanketed the world and gained exceptional popularity due mostly to technological necessity.

It would be decades before Hedy Lamarr would be given recognition for her vital role in the creation and rollout of these two revolutionary technologies. This came in the late 1990s only 3 years before her passing. She received the Electronic Frontier Foundation Pioneer Award, as well as the Bulbie Gnass Spirit of Achievement Bronze Award. However, due to presumed embarrassment about her appearance because of botched plastic surgery, she didn’t accept them in person.

Lamarr was posthumously inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame as recently as 2014, nearly ¾ of a century after her ground-breaking work.

Even if she isn’t still around to see it, developments of her work certainly are, and these are fitting tributes. Hedy continues to receive the types of relevant recognition of her intelligence she deserves. A TV series of her real life, Hedy Lamarr, began pre-production in 2018, and the award-winning Australian spy techno thriller, Yearn to Fear, was released in late 2020, using 5G Wi-Fi technology in its central plot while acknowledging Hedy’s contribution.

Self-Taught Inventor

What is perhaps most remarkable about Hedy Lamarr’s role in the development of Wi-Fi is

that she was self-taught. She never had any sort of formal training. Perhaps this actually allowed her to think outside the box since she had no idea what the box was supposed to be. Combining her own life experiences with her creative imagination and intellect, helped her produce one of the most vital inventions of the modern era. Thanks to her following her passion, she was able to make her mark on the world, leave a legacy and help society achieve greater progress.

Evolution Of Wi-Fi

The 1970s saw the creation of ALOHAnet, as well as the ALOHA protocol. These were used to make it easier for people on the Hawaiian Islands to communicate with each other using a UHF wireless packet network.

These two technologies were possible thanks to Lamarr’s Secret Communication System,

and were the predecessors of Ethernet and Wi-Fi. Around this time was when Vic Hayes, who has been called the “Father of Wi-Fi,” developed the IEEE 802.11 Standards Working Group. This standard protocol would eventually launch in 1997. Although being very slow at the time compared to speeds that are possible today, it’s speed of 2Mb/s, was incredibly fast. Two years later, 802.11b was launched, which increased transmission speed up to 11Mb/s. This is around the time the Wireless Ethernet Compatibility Alliance was formed, which ended up becoming the WiFi Alliance. It was at this point that Wi-Fi became a term the public started using to refer to wireless internet.

Wi-Fi has become an integral part of society, used by businesses, governments, and

consumers alike. Billions of people use it every day. There is perhaps no technology that has made a bigger impact in recent history than Wi-Fi. We owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to the woman who became the pioneer of Wi-Fi, even if Hedy Lamarr didn’t know it at the time.

Conclusion

You can see how Hedy Lamarr became the de-facto inventor of Wi-Fi. While she may have

started out as a Hollywood actress, and a very good one at that, her true calling was inventing. Not only was she an inventor, she was that someone who came up with an invention that revolutionised the world, helping pave the way for the Third Industrial Revolution. Hedy’s story shows us that anyone can achieve great things. It also demonstrates that following your passions is something that can lead to extraordinary feats, even if not fully recognised in your own lifetime.

Cheers! Chas

Chas's latest books are available - Here

To keep up to date with Chas's books and blogs please subscribe - Here