If the Hindenburg was Carrying Helium...

If the Hindenburg had been carrying the more expensive helium (America had embargoed it to Germany, and they had the largest supply) instead of hydrogen, and thus not caught on fire, what would have happened to zeppelin travel?

I don't think zeppelins would have lasted very long. They would have been to connected with the Third Reich, and better plane technology would have eventually rendered their role as airline ships useless. Perhaps they could have stayed on like cruise liners today?

Thoughts?

A couple of friends of mine were claiming that the HInderberg did not burn because of hydrogen but because of an issue with it's paint.

I haven't bothered to fact check that claim yet, but I pass it on FYI.

Corbell Mark IV said:

A couple of friends of mine were claiming that the HInderberg did not burn because of hydrogen but because of an issue with it's paint.

I haven't bothered to fact check that claim yet, but I pass it on FYI.

Click to expand...

Really? Hmm...

Well, if the Hindenburg hadn't caught on fire (period), what would have happened?

Mythbusters did a whole episode on it.

Regardless of the paint issue (the dope on the fabric, which is also flammable)the explosion was catastrophic becasuse the ship was filled with 8 million cubic feet of hydrogen.

If the Hindenburg had been filled with Helium, the Germans would probably have maintained transatlantic passenger service into 1939, with 2 ships: Hindenburg and the new Graf Zeppelin (a sister ship replacing the original Graf Zeppelin that was scheduled to enter service in 1938). It is remotely possible that a followup zeppelin completely optimized for use of Helium might have been completed by 1940, but the outbreak of WW2 would have ended era of passenger zeppelins. The Nazis were not particularly fond of the airships and they and their hangars/fabricating plants would have been demolished to make way for warplane production in 1940 as in OTL). Since no other nation was building zeppelin airships in the late 30's this would almost certainly end the era for good.

However, it is remotely possible that, absent the very visible Hindenburg disaster an attempt could have been made in the decade following WW2 to resurrect zeppelin transport, either by Zeppelin in Germany or Goodyear-Zeppelin in the USA. Goodyear did propose passenger airships in the 1945-49 period, and perhaps had the Hindenbeg disaster not occurred, the plans might have found more traction. By the time jet airliners were operational however, the zeppelin would be dead as a means of passenger travel - far too slow to complete with airliners and not luxurious enough to compete with the few remaining ocean liners.

far too slow to complete with airliners and not luxurious enough to compete with the few remaining ocean liners.

Click to expand...

Could they make another comeback then as ocean liners disappear and airlines start treating people worse?

How do they stack up on fuel usage? I heard somewhere that zepplins actually use more fuel than planes, but that doesn't make sense.

After all a plane has to burn fuel just to stay in the air and a zepplin doesn't.

Corbell Mark IV said:

A couple of friends of mine were claiming that the HInderberg did not burn because of hydrogen but because of an issue with it's paint.

I haven't bothered to fact check that claim yet, but I pass it on FYI.

Click to expand...

I've heard that too. Its called the Incendiary Paint Theory. It was developed by a Space Shuttle engineer who was also a Zeppelin enthusiast and noticed that the recipe for the Hindenburg's exterior weather proofing compound is almost identical to the propellant recipe for the Space Shuttle's SRBs.

mowque said:

Mythbusters did a whole episode on it.

Click to expand...

I saw that episode. IMHO it was one of the few instances where Adam and Jamie came to the wrong conclusion.

Pesterfield said:

Could they make another comeback then as ocean liners disappear and airlines start treating people worse?

How do they stack up on fuel usage? I heard somewhere that zepplins actually use more fuel than planes, but that doesn't make sense.

After all a plane has to burn fuel just to stay in the air and a zepplin doesn't.

Click to expand...

It's all economics and speed.

A modern zeppelin a bit larger than the Hindenburg (say 950 feet long and 10,000,000 cubic feet) could probably carry 100 passengers across the atlantic in relative luxury compared to airliners (50 small train car sized staterooms, sit-down meals with good food and cruise-ship quality table service, plenty of space to walk around and socialize, possibly on-board entertainment, etc). The trip would take between 2 and 3 days, far faster than a modern cruise liner, but way less than the 10 hours a plane takes.

The zeppelin would probably require a crew of 40-50 to operate, and massive investment in infrastructure (hangars,fabricating plants). Based upon the price for passenger tickets on the 1930's zeppelins (several hundred USD per ticket in 1930's money), passenger tickets would probably approach the cost of a modern non-discounted balcony suite on a cruise ship (2000-4000 USD per passenger) and, luggage would also be weight limited. There is simply no way an airship which needs to be lightly built could reproduce the opulence one experiences in an ocean liner.

The main advantages of airship travel would be the fact that jet lag would be avoided, the experience would be very pleasant, and passengers would arrive at their destinations well-rested and happy. Unfortunately, in today's world I suspect most people would rather get there faster and suffer with the unpleasantness of airplanes and airlines.

You can fit an aircraft carrier inside of a Zeppelin, so fuel issues make sense. Once you get much past WW2, Zeppelins are gimmick ships with long endurance and fast speeds compared to ships. Basically a tourist ships. For example, you can do an overnight site seeing trip for Antarctic whales out of New Zealand. You can also do long endurance AWAC type uses. Zeppelin is good for any role where you need to be in the air for many days and you need more speed than a ship or to go overland.

Now there is an off chance that the Zeppelins could be kept in service in WW2, if sold to neutral country. For example, if a Brazilian company buys the Graf Spee, you can covert the Brazil to Germany route to Brazil to Portugal.

BlondieBC said:

You can fit an aircraft carrier inside of a Zeppelin, so fuel issues make sense. Once you get much past WW2, Zeppelins are gimmick ships with long endurance and fast speeds compared to ships. Basically a tourist ships. For example, you can do an overnight site seeing trip for Antarctic whales out of New Zealand. You can also do long endurance AWAC type uses. Zeppelin is good for any role where you need to be in the air for many days and you need more speed than a ship or to go overland.

Now there is an off chance that the Zeppelins could be kept in service in WW2, if sold to neutral country. For example, if a Brazilian company buys the Graf Spee, you can covert the Brazil to Germany route to Brazil to Portugal.

Click to expand...

Could they be used by neutrals as a way to avoid U-Boat patrols with regards to shipping?

Also, when the technology becomes available, it would be quite easy to power an airship with a nuclear fast reactor, either as an electrical generator for powering utilities, lighting and electrical turbopropellers or with a coolant loop feeding the heat into a turbojet engine.

Rognvald said:

Could they be used by neutrals as a way to avoid U-Boat patrols with regards to shipping?

Click to expand...

In theory, probably yes, but what's to stop the Germans from slapping a neutral flag on a Zeppelin to get past North American coastal defenses for say, transatlanic bombing missions or to sneak enemy agents on to American and Canadian soil. Its mostly forgotten today, London was blitzed fairly badly by Zeppelins on bombing missions during World War I.

BlondieBC said:

Now there is an off chance that the Zeppelins could be kept in service in WW2, if sold to neutral country. For example, if a Brazilian company buys the Graf Spee, you can covert the Brazil to Germany route to Brazil to Portugal.

Click to expand...

Interesting, but I presume you mean the Graf Zeppelin, not a pocket battleship. In a TL posted on this site a few years ago, I proposed the sale of a passenger zeppelin stranded in the USA when WW2 broke out in 1939 to the US Navy.

https://www.alternatehistory.com/discussion/showthread.php?t=118973&highlight=naval+airships+zoomar

This was in the context of continued US use of rigid airships for ASW. A commercial sale/transfer to the USA Goodyear/Zeppelin corporation would also be a possibility if there was will on both sides of the atlantic to keep the passenger airship alive.

Rognvald said:

Could they be used by neutrals as a way to avoid U-Boat patrols with regards to shipping?

Click to expand...

Low payload, a few hundred thousand pounds. But yes for high value light weight items such a bearer bonds, paintings, and precious metals, they could make a lot of sense.

My Username is Inigo Montoya said:

Also, when the technology becomes available, it would be quite easy to power an airship with a nuclear fast reactor, either as an electrical generator for powering utilities, lighting and electrical turbopropellers or with a coolant loop feeding the heat into a turbojet engine.

Click to expand...

I am I reading that right? Did you just proposed a nuclear Zeppelin TL?!

The economics for zeppelin is in cargo, not passengers. Cargo zeppelins could be sent to provide supplies and equipment in areas without airfields or much infrastructure.

However, the most demand for such things would be in landlocked countries without sea access or good railheads. That would limit it to Central Asia or Africa.

Blackfox5 said:

The economics for zeppelin is in cargo, not passengers. Cargo zeppelins could be sent to provide supplies and equipment in areas without airfields or much infrastructure.

However, the most demand for such things would be in landlocked countries without sea access or good railheads. That would limit it to Central Asia or Africa.

Click to expand...

And how important are they to the global trade network?

mowque said:

And how important are they to the global trade network?

Click to expand...

I think it would depend out how you want to look at. In and of themselves, Zeppelins won't be that important, as they won't replace ships or trains for moving cargo in quantity, but they can get to places that would physically impossible to access in any other way.

Rognvald said:

Could they be used by neutrals as a way to avoid U-Boat patrols with regards to shipping?

Click to expand...

You've got to go way back for a PoD that would give neutrals (other than the USA) enough zeppelin airships to make a different. Also, as I noted elsewhere, even the smallest tramp steamer could carry far more cargo and people than the biggest zeppelin ever constructed. As an experiment in high speed airlift back in the 1930's the US Navy's USS Akron (one of the largest zeppelins built) made a test flight with about 200 equipped soldiers on board and that was about the max she could carry. Perhaps as BlondieBS says, this would have use for shipping very unique, special, light weight cargo.