# The Hindenburgh doesn't burst into flames; effect on the fate of rigid airships? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 25, 2009, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591 "2009-12-25T23:54:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 12\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2009, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/21 "2009-12-27T21:52:44Z")
Without the ungodly bad PR that the disaster created, I think airships might have maintained a niche market for people that wanted to travel in class and comfort, with absolute cost and speed being a secondary consideration. With modern technology they would probably still be the safest way to cross long distances, like oceans. ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [December 27, 2009, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/22 "2009-12-27T23:55:11Z")
> [@sailboat](#): > > The blimps weren’t really supposed to kill subs, they were supposed to force them to submerge by the threat of spotting them if they surfaced. A submerged diesel-electric sub was much less dangerous in the strategic sense, because of greatly limited mobility on batteries. One did duke it out with a U-boat [http://www.history.navy.mil/nan/backissues/1990s/1997/ma97/blimp.pdf](http://www.history.navy.mil/nan/backissues/1990s/1997/ma97/blimp.pdf) ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2009, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/23 "2009-12-28T04:42:55Z")
Between Detroit and Chicago, between Boston and New York and other close cities it would make sense. They don’t use as much gas. They wont have you tied up in an airport for hours. I wonder how high they would have to fly? ---
**Author:** ![levdrakon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@levdrakon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/levdrakon)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2009, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/24 "2009-12-28T04:49:11Z")
[These guys](http://www.jpaerospace.com/) seem serious about using “balloons” to get to orbit. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2009, 10:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/25 "2009-12-28T10:34:33Z")
> [@Icerigger](#): > > One did duke it out with a U-boat > [http://www.history.navy.mil/nan/backissues/1990s/1997/ma97/blimp.pdf](http://www.history.navy.mil/nan/backissues/1990s/1997/ma97/blimp.pdf) It’s a shame the bomb racks jammed. They could have sunk the sub. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2009, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/26 "2009-12-28T16:28:02Z")
> [@Mr.Excellent](#): > > Even in terms of loiter capacity, we’re coming very close to the point where solar or fuel-cell powered drone aircraft could loiter over a fixed location indefinitely. That sounds far too enviro-friendly. Just slap a [nuclear reactor](http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn3406) on it. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2009, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/27 "2009-12-28T20:50:31Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Between Detroit and Chicago, between Boston and New York and other close cities it would make sense. They don’t use as much gas. They wont have you tied up in an airport for hours. I wonder how high they would have to fly? How much security would a helium zeppelin need? Hijacking one would be much harder than in a plane (though with modern technology we probally could automate one so that it had a much smaller crew). Zeppelin + skyscraper = broken windows on the skyscraper and a totaled zeppelin. Even sneaking a bomb on board would do much less damage than on an airliner. It might disable her, but she’d still be airborne. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2009, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/28 "2009-12-28T23:21:01Z")
_sigh_ [If only . . .](http://davidszondy.com/future/Flight/vickers.htm) > [@](#): > > In 1919, with the Great War over, the Vickers Company drew up plans for the next step in airship evolution. They were going to build the Trans-Oceanic Airship. This would not be any ordinary airship, however. At 800 Feet long and 100 feet in diameter, the Vickers Trans-Oceanic Airship would have been nearly as large as the Hindenburg itself, yet would have carried 100 passengers (twice that of the German gasbag) in not only comfort, but outright luxury. > > The Vickers airship also differed from the Hindenburg in that the passenger compartment was on top of the gasbag rather than below. Not only did this keep the passengers away from the noise of the engines, but it allowed for spectacular views from what would have been an alarmingly windy promenade deck. > > Needless to say, the service would have been something that has become all but forgotten on today’s airliners. This dining room is as far from today’s cattle car in the sky as the Dover boat train is from the Orient Express. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2009, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/29 "2009-12-29T16:53:17Z")
It was doomed as a commercial opportunity, as already explained. But the larger operational issue may have always been airships’ helplessness against storms, not the flammability of hydrogen. It’s almost unfair that the “Hindenburg effect” was the coup de grace, but if it hadn’t been, the Akron/Macon/Shenandoah effect would/should have been. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Excellent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f19dbf/32.png) [@Mr.Excellent](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Excellent)\ **Post date:** [December 30, 2009, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/30 "2009-12-30T14:44:42Z")
> [@psychonaut](#): > > Speed isn’t everything. Many people, myself included, would rather spend a day or two in a relatively spacious cabin (on a train or a ship or, probably, a zeppelin) than ten hours in cramped economy-class airline seating, even if it costs more. (And much of the time it actually costs less!) This is obviously true or else we wouldn’t have so many train and long-distance ferry services. Ships and zeppelins, and to a lesser extent trains, are wonderful spacious vehicles where you have your own room, can get up and walk around, go to restaurants, etc. Agreed. I took Amtrak from D.C. to Montreal for Worldcon last summer - about a fifteen-hour ride all told, but the scenery from upstate New York onward was stunning. Sitting in the dining car, reading while the Hudson went by, with wine and cheese at hand, was one of my very favorite parts of that trip. Unless I truly need to get someplace fast, I’ll take a train over a plane any day of the week. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2009, 5:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/31 "2009-12-31T05:23:52Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Except that the **horse** _has been supplanted by technologies that either do their job better, or eliminate the need of them altogether._ Not true, at least when it comes to law enforcement: [Are Police Department Mounted Units anachronisms or still useful? - In My Humble Opinion - Straight Dope Message Board](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=358252) ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [December 31, 2009, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591/32 "2009-12-31T14:01:34Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > While the blimps hardly got any sinkings, which can be measured, I’d think it’s pretty hard to measure objectively how effective the blimps were at deterring U-boat captains from surfacing, which is the key issue. Nevertheless as part of the overall system of making life hard for U-boats I think they helped. The statistic that could be measured is that “no ship was ever lost from a convoy escorted by a blimp”\*. That seems a pretty significant measurement. \*Assuming that it’s true. I don’t have any cite; I just recall reading it from a book on WWII some years ago. But it does make sense. I know that convoys had significantly reduced losses while escorted by airplanes, but planes couldn’t cover a big part of the middle Atlantic, and due to fuel limits & speed differences, could only stay overhead a limited period of time. A blimp could stay at about the same speed as the convoy, and could carry enough fuel to stay overhead all the way across the Atlantic. So it seems likely that a blimp watching overhead, and communicating with the armed escort vessels, would be very effective in protecting the convoy. (And note, the guiding principle of convoy escorts was _the safe and timely arrival of the convoy_, NOT the sinking of submarines. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-hindenburgh-doesnt-burst-into-flames-effect-on-the-fate-of-rigid-airships/522591.md?page=1)