There is a myth that Hydrogen was the cause of the Hindenburg airship disaster in 1937. What was the cause?

Question

Recently NASA investigator Dr.Addison Bain duplicated the ignition by static discharge to the substance that "covered" the airship, proving that even if it was a Helium blimp, the disaster would have still happened.

Answer 1

The cause was recently elucidated by a NASA engineer, Addison Bain. The Hindenburg was coated with a new doping compound on the canvas cover. The purpose of the doping compound was to make the canvas more slippery to wind, and to reflect solar heat. Unfortunately, the new doping compound was composed of cellulose acetate and nitrate (which is used in gunpowder) and a mixture of iron oxide and aluminum powder, in nearly the exact ratio that iron oxide and Al powder would be used as a solid rocket fuel several decades later. The ignition source of the fire was thought to be static electricity, although sabotage may have played a factor.

The PBS documentary below outlined Bain's theory, and the clincher was when he obtained a piece of the original fabric, picked up by a child on site the day after the Hindenburg burned, and ignited it with a static electricity bolt. It went up in a whoosh of flame (it convinced me).

Answer 2

Here are some theories of the cause of the disaster other than the obvious flammablity of Hydrogen:

Sabotage theory

At the time, sabotage was commonly put forward as the cause of the fire, in particular by Hugo Eckener, former head of the Zeppelin company and the "old man" of the German airships. The Zeppelin airships were widely seen as symbols of German and Nazi power. As such, they would have made tempting targets for opponents of the Nazis.

Several theories as to who the alleged saboteur may have been have been put forward. In particular, some have alleged that Zionist agents working against increasingly anti-semitic Germany were behind the fire.


Static spark theory

Although the evidence is by no means conclusive, a reasonably strong case can be made for an alternative theory that the fire was started by a spark caused by a buildup of static electricity.

Proponents of the "static spark" theory point out that the airship's skin was not constructed in a way that allowed its charge to be evenly distributed, and the skin was separated from the duralumin frame by nonconductive ramie cords. This may have allowed a potential difference between the wet Zeppelin and the ground to form. The ship passed through a weather front where the humidity was high. This made the mooring lines wet and therefore conductive. As the ship moved through the air, its skin may have become charged. When the wet mooring lines connected to the duralumin frame touched the ground, they would have grounded the duralumin frame. The grounding of the frame may thus have caused an electrical discharge to jump from the skin to the grounded frame.


Puncture theory

Another popular theory put forward referred to the film footage taken during the disaster, in which the Hindenburg can be seen taking a rather sharp turn prior to bursting into flames. Some experts speculate that one of the many bracing wires within the structure of the airship may have snapped and punctured the fabric of one or more of the internal gas cells.

Answer 3

Of course no one knows what caused the ignition, but there is no doubt that the hydrogen in its gas bags was ignited and consumed the airship. Helium is non flammable so only the airship fabric could burn and not fast enough to prevent some type of landing of the craft. The investigation was also very incomplete. The best estimate is the ship was booby trapped with a timed pyrotechnic device sewn into one of the gas bags. It was scheduled to go off after the ship was in its hangar. All metal parts including the remains of the timer were shipped back to Germany and the investigation quietly closed.

Answer 4

Noone knows for certain extactly what caused the Hindenburg disaster, but there are reasonable guesses.

The Hindenburg was filled with hydrogen (hydrogen being more lighter than helium and cheaper at that time) and is combustible.

I don't doubt that if the Hindenburg had been filled with helium the same thing would have happened.

More than likely, there was a fault in the electrical wireing somewhere which ignited the hydrogen, but I repeat it is impossible to ever know for sure.

Answer 5

It is not a myth: it is true. A static discharge could not have ignited the covering material, because it was too thin to get hot enough to burn: the air outside and the gas inside would quickly cool the surface. Only a very large electrical discharge (a lightning bolt) could supply enough heat to set the covering material on fire. But such a fire would not have instantly destroyed the airship had it been filled with helium. I know of no instances of electrical discharges having set fabric-covered airplanes on fire. I am not familiar with Bain's experiment, however.
-- Robert A. Saunders, Lake Stevens, WA.

Answer 6

The most widely accepted reason for the explosion of the Hindenburg was lightning igniting the hydrogen within the ship. Lightning was present in the area while the ship was trying to dock. A blue glow was seen around tail of the ship just before the explosion.

Answer 7

So, the hydrogen didn't burn?

The "cause" of the disaster may well have been a static ignition.

The enormous quantity of highly flammable hydrogen certainly affected the extent and nature of the disaster.

Answer 8

It wasn't a myth! Hydrogen is highly flammable and combines with oxygen as it burns to form water!

The Hindenburg was full of hydrogen so when it caught on fire, it completely burned up.

Helium is a noble inert gas. It won't burn so that is why it is used now instead of hydrogen!

Answer 9

helium and static electricity,caused a huge explosion.actually you answered your own question

Answer 10

some one lit a cigar.