The image compares four narrow-body aircraft configurations: the conventional Airbus A320 and A321, alongside two hydrogen-powered concept variants labeled 'Transcontinental H2' and 'Transatlantic H2.' The H2 variants show large cylindrical hydrogen fuel tanks visible in the aft fuselage section, illustrating how liquid hydrogen storage would be integrated into the A320/A321 airframe for medium- and long-range zero-emission flight.

Notes

Technical diagram showing side-by-side size comparison of four aircraft types: Airbus A320, A321, and two variants of hydrogen-powered aircraft designed for transcontinental and transatlantic routes. The diagram illustrates the relative scale and configuration differences between conventional and hydrogen aircraft designs.

Sidebar On/Off

As the source for federal transportation grants, the Puget Sound Regional Council was charged with developing a system to meet the growing need for commercial aviation. When the search for a second airport failed, they authorized the Port of Seattle to build the Third Runway, with a mandate to develop a noise abatement and mitigation program. In their effort to stop the Third Runway, the ACC argued over every detail of the Port's efforts--including property buyouts and sound insulation. The dispute was meant to be settled by a three member Expert Arbitration Panel. This is their final report. It finds 2-1, that the Port's program was insufficient in several respects. Despite that, funding for the Third Runway was approved by the PSRC, and the 'Port Package' program, proceeded largely unchanged. Expert Arbitration Panel's final decision finding that the Port of Seattle had not shown sufficient reduction in real on-the-ground noise impacts to satisfy noise reduction conditions required for approval of a third runway at Sea-Tac International Airport. The majority decision concluded the Port's noise abatement programs were insufficient despite being impressive in scope.

continue...

V V

Notes

Message