Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

The crazy, crazy fact:

Fatalities 36 (13 passengers, 22 crewmen, 1 bystander) Survivors 62 (23 passengers, 39 crewmen)

Looking at the video, you certainly would not expect two thirds of the people on board to survive the hellish fire.




Apparently, most of the passengers were along the window bay in preparation for landing. They were able to hop out of the windows as the guest compartment reached a safe distance to the ground, and before hot wreckage could fall on them.

The three things that saved them was A) an airship, even one leaking and on fire, had a slow enough fall to safely evacuate B) the majority of fuel sources were above the crew and guests and C) most of the guests had an easy exit.


About half of the guests had an easy exit, the other half were on the other side of the airship where the door had become jammed, most of the people on that side perished in the flames.


Indeed, a little over half a minute from the start of the fire to total destruction of the airframe, it is amazing that there were that many survivors. Important to note that the crew and the airframe itself were two separate components, but that the passenger area was embedded in the fuselage.

More miraculously when you have seen that footage is to realize that some of the passengers and crew walked away without major injury.


It is mostly hydrogen, so most of the energy was dissipated in the first few seconds. Most of the other materials or do not burn well or have very low thermal capacity. It was not on its highest altitude when burning started and drag dumped the falling to much slower speeds than a free-falling person.

I'd estimate that most people who died were trapped or unable to move. Those who were free to run and had enough "air" were very likely to survive.


Also, hydrogen being much lighter than air, a lot of the burning and associated heat was above the zeppelin.

Slightly related question: this film talks about “white hot steel”. It wasn’t steel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duralumin#Aviation_application...). Was it white hot?


Heat rises, and the passengers were all below the fire. I suspect many of the deaths were from being crushed as it fell on them.


I’ve read that most fatalities were people jumping out, and those who stayed inside until the burning airship touched down mostly walked away.

Edit: that’s not quite correct, Wikipedia has a better summary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindenburg_disaster


Hydrogen does not burn energetically, especially before it has been mixed with oxygen. The tragedy was caused by the coating used on the exterior which was essentially solid rocket fuel.


That theory has been largely discredited. There wasn't nearly enough reagents in the fabric to create a large thermite reaction. An oxyhydrogen explosion is the most likely explanation: there was probably a leak prior to the explosion, which allowed air to mix with hydrogen inside and surrounding some of the gas bladders. Also, a walkway ran through the bladders, which acted as an oxygen source once the bladders burst, as evidenced by flames being directed through the axial walkway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindenburg_disaster#Incendiary...


> Hydrogen does not burn energetically, especially before it has been mixed with oxygen.

Drop the word "especially" and I might agree, but a mere party balloon of hydrogen mixed with oxygen in a stoichiometric ratio going off will sound like a rifle and rattle windows.


When I was young, I volunteered at a science museum who would, as part of their chemistry show, fill a balloon with hydrogen and ignite it off a tesla coil. One time, we (~15yo kids) convinced the person giving the show (maybe...college age kid?) to also mix O2 in the balloon, instead of only H2.

The boom was so loud that management folks on the other floors sent people down to see WTF was happening. I don't think he got into (much) trouble, but he sure never did that again.


I don't know why this theory is repeated as though it's fact. The explanation that a lifting gas bag ruptured, mixing it's contents with the air seems a better fit to the witness accounts.


New footage shows the tail-fins catch fire before the gas-bladders erupted. Those tail-fins must, therefore, have been quite flammable. The video suggests that the trigger for the fire was the release of a large build up of static electricity on approaching proximity to the ground. An airship is essentially, an oversized Leyden jar, and such a build up would cause problems, even for ones using helium for lift.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFCgipjR2ow


The Hindenberg was also reportedly quite tail-heavy coming in for landing, which suggests a leak. If it was leaking at the tail and this was triggered by static discharge it would fit most of the facts.


> New footage shows the tail-fins catch fire before the gas-bladders erupted.

In the film you link the entire rear half of the craft is on fire from the first frame.


This happens quite often with accidental explosions I've noticed. Explosions are not as lethal as you might expect, unless someone deliberately ensured that it caused a lot of damage.


It was a design flaw. The flames were able to travel quickly through the central passage which passed through the center of the gas-bladders. The footage shows flames venting from the nose of the airship.


Were all in the zeppelin when it caught fire?


yes. It hadn't landed yet.


One of the deaths was a ground crewman, Allen Hagaman.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: