The Hindenburg Disaster
Why the Airship Burned and Why Airships Ended
- 17 chapters
- 52m
- Aerospace
- Free · no sign-up
The audiobook examines what caused the fire through multiple theories. Chapters cover the landing timeline, news coverage, and various explanations including sabotage, static electricity, lightning, engine failure, and structural issues. Specific hypotheses discussed include incendiary paint, puncture theory, fuel leak, and the role of the airship's initial fuel source.
Listeners will find this audiobook valuable who want to understand how one catastrophic event ended an entire transportation era.
Listen
-
Read this chapter
The Graf Zeppelin, LZ 127, had been launched in 1928, and the Hindenburg was its successor. On March 4, 1936, the Hindenburg made its first flight, and over the next ten trips to the United States, it encountered no problems. In late March 1937, after finishing a round-trip journey to Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, the Hindenburg set off from Frankfurt, Germany, on May 3. That evening's voyage marked the beginning of ten scheduled round trips between Europe and the United States for the airship’s second season of commercial travel.
American Airlines had arranged for the Hindenburg airship operators to transport passengers from Lakehurst to Newark, where they would connect to airplane flights. This was part of a larger plan to move people quickly between cities using both airships and planes. The airship was designed to carry travelers efficiently across long distances, linking up with other forms of transportation at key points. Passengers were able to make connections without having to wait hours or days for trains or slower ships. The operators worked closely with airlines to ensure smooth travel experiences for those who chose this new kind of journey. This cooperation between airship and airplane services showed how modern transportation was beginning to work together. The Hindenburg was one of the main vessels used in this system, helping travelers reach their destinations faster than ever before.
The Hindenburg’s journey across the Atlantic was mostly uneventful, aside from some headwinds that slowed its pace. Three days later, on May 6, the airship prepared for an early-evening landing at Lakehurst. On this return trip, it carried only thirty-six passengers and sixty-one crew members, including twenty-one trainees—less than half its usual load. Still, the flight was fully booked for its trip back.
The Hindenburg was already delayed when it flew over Boston on May 6, with landing at Lakehurst expected to be pushed back by thunderstorms rolling in that afternoon. Captain Max Pruss, learning of the weather trouble, changed course over Manhattan, drawing crowds into the streets. At 4 p.m. EDT, the airship passed over the field, and Pruss led passengers on a tour along New Jersey’s shore while waiting for conditions to improve. When notified at 6:22 p.m. that the storms had cleared, he turned the ship back toward Lakehurst, arriving nearly half a day late. That left little time to prepare the airship for its return trip to Europe, so the public was told they would not be allowed near the mooring or aboard during the brief stop.
-
Read this chapter
At around 7:00 p.m. EDT, the Hindenburg began its final approach to the Lakehurst Naval Air Station, flying at an altitude of 650 feet. This was a high landing, also called a flying moor, where the airship would drop its landing ropes and mooring cable while still elevated, then be winched down to the mooring mast. The procedure was meant to reduce the number of crew members needed on the ground but took more time. Although this type of landing was common for American airships, the Hindenburg had only done it a few times in 1936 when coming into Lakehurst.
At 7:09 p.m., the airship executed a sudden, full-speed left turn to the west as it approached the landing field, forced to do so because the ground crew was unprepared. Just two minutes later, at 7:11 p.m., it swung back toward the field and began releasing gas. The engines idled forward as the vessel started to lose speed. Then, at 7:14 p.m., Captain Pruss gave the command to put the aft engines full astern while the airship hovered at 394 feet above the ground, attempting to slow its descent.
As the airship approached the mooring mast, wind direction changed at 7:17 p.m., forcing Captain Pruss to make a sharp turn to starboard and follow an S-shaped path. Just one minute later, at 7:18 p.m., he ordered the release of water ballast in three stages—660, 660, and 1100 pounds—aimed at correcting the ship’s stern-heavy balance. The forward gas cells were also opened, but these adjustments did not bring the airship into proper trim. In response, six men were sent to the bow to manually adjust the balance, a task that would cost three of them their lives in the disaster that followed.
At 7:21 p.m., as the Hindenburg drifted at 295 feet above the ground, the crew began lowering the mooring lines. The starboard line was dropped first, then the port line followed. The port line became overtightened during its connection to the post of the ground winch. At that moment, the starboard line had still not been secured. A light rain started to fall, and the ground crew hurried to grab hold of the lines.
At 7:25 p.m., several witnesses described fabric fluttering as though gas were escaping while others saw a faint blue flame—possibly static electricity or St. Elmo's Fire—moments before fire erupted on the ship's top and rear near the point where it first appeared. Some accounts indicate the initial flame started on the port side just ahead of the port fin, with flames soon spreading upward. Commander Rosendahl later described the flames in front of the upper fin as "mushroom-shaped." A witness on the starboard side reported fire beginning lower and behind the rudder on that side. On board, people heard a muffled explosion, and those in the front of the ship felt a sudden jolt when the port trail rope tightened sharply; the officers in the control car at first believed the shock came from a broken rope.
-
Read this chapter
At 7:25 p.m. EDT, the Hindenburg burst into flames and was soon fully ablaze. Eyewitnesses could not agree on where the fire first appeared—some on the port side reported yellow-red flames leaping from near the ventilation shaft of cells four and five, while others said it began just ahead of the horizontal port fin before spreading to the upper fin. A witness on the starboard side claimed flames started lower and farther aft, near cell one behind the rudders. Inside, helmsman Helmut Lau heard a muffled detonation and looked up to see a bright reflection on the front bulkhead of gas cell four, which "suddenly disappeared by the heat." As more gas cells ignited, the fire spread toward the starboard side and the airship dropped quickly.
The flames moved fast, eating through the forward sections first, consuming cells one to nine, as the back of the airship gave way. The blast caused a sudden collapse at the rear, and almost immediately, two tanks burst from the hull—whether filled with water or fuel remains unclear. The loss of buoyancy hit the stern hard, sending the bow upward while the ship’s body snapped in two. The broken stern stayed level as it fell.
As the airship's nose plunged toward the ground, flames erupted from the bow, killing nine of the twelve crew members who were still inside. The hydrogen gas in that section kept burning, causing the front of the ship to rise briefly even as the rear collapsed. The cell behind the passenger cabins ignited as the outer structure gave way, and the word "Hindenburg" faded under the fire as the bow dropped. The gondola's wheel touched the ground, sending the bow upward for a moment before it crashed hard. Most of the fabric had already burned away, but the diesel fuel continued to burn for hours after the hydrogen was gone. Chief Petty Officer Frederick J. "Bull" Tobin, who led the Navy landing party and had survived the crash of the American airship USS Shenandoah, shouted, "Navy men, stand fast!" to organize his team into rescue efforts despite the flames.
The time from the first sign of trouble to the airship’s final crash was reported as anywhere between thirty-two and thirty-seven seconds. Because no newsreel cameras were filming the Hindenburg when the fire began, experts had to estimate the start based on eyewitness reports and the length of available footage. One analysis, done by NASA's Addison Bain, found that the flame spread across the airship’s fabric at around forty-nine feet per second at certain moments, which would mean the entire destruction took about sixteen seconds.
After the Hindenburg disaster, some of the airship’s duralumin framework was sent back to Germany. There, it was recycled and used in building military aircraft for the Luftwaffe. The frames from the LZ 127 Graf Zeppelin were also reused this way, as were the frames from the LZ 130 Graf Zeppelin II. Both of those airships were scrapped in 1940.
After the disaster, officials from both the United States and Germany began looking into what happened. The U.S. government started an investigation through the Commerce Department, with Colonel South Trimble Jr. in charge. At the same time, a separate commission was formed in Germany, led by Hugo Eckener. Both groups were tasked with figuring out why the airship caught fire and crashed.
-
Read this chapter
The disaster was well-documented. Journalists had gathered at the site due to advance publicity surrounding the Zeppelin’s first transatlantic passenger flight of the year to the United States. Among those present were news crews who recorded the explosion on film and took photographs. Herbert Morrison provided an eyewitness account for radio station WLS in Chicago, which was broadcast the following day.
An audio engineer and Morrison had chosen the arrival of the Hindenburg to experiment with recording for delayed broadcast. Although radio broadcasts were not routinely recorded at the time, this decision would preserve Morrison’s narration of the disaster. Parts of his broadcast were later dubbed onto newsreel footage, creating a false impression that the words and film were recorded together. That was not accurate.
The airship was practically motionless now, with ropes dropped from its nose and grabbed by men on the field. It started raining again, the back motors holding it just enough to keep it from drifting. Then it burst into flames—fire and falling, crashing, terrible. “Get out of the way!” someone shouted. “It’s burning and bursting into flames and the... and it’s falling on the mooring mast.” The crash was horrific, with smoke and flames climbing four or five hundred feet into the sky. Passengers screamed around, and one reporter couldn’t even speak, saying he couldn’t breathe, that he had to step inside where he couldn’t see. “This is the worst thing I’ve ever witnessed,” he said. “I can’t talk.”
The Hindenburg disaster was captured on film by four newsreel crews: Pathé News, Movietone News, Hearst News of the Day, and Paramount News. Al Gold of Fox Movietone News was later awarded a Presidential Citation for his efforts. Sam Shere of International News Photos took one of the most widely shared images, a crash scene with the mooring mast in the foreground; he snapped it "from the hip" as the fire erupted. Murray Becker of Associated Press recorded the airship engulfed in flames while still level, using his 4 × 5 Speed Graphic camera, followed by another shot showing flames bursting from the nose as the bow rose upward. Among the professionals, spectators also documented the event. Arthur Cofod Jr., a customs broker, and 16-year-old Foo Chu, both with Leica cameras and high-speed film, took more photos than the press photographers. Nine of Cofod's images appeared in Life magazine, while Chu's were published in the New York Daily News.
The disaster's images and Morrison’s vivid storytelling destroyed trust in airships across the public and aviation industry. The rise of international flight, especially with Pan American Airlines, also played a role in Zeppelin decline. At the time, airplanes were already crossing oceans much faster than the Hindenburg could travel, moving at just 130 kilometers per hour.
While the United States covered the disaster widely, media attention in Germany was quieter. Some photos appeared in newspapers, but newsreel footage didn’t surface until after World War II. German victims were honored like wartime heroes, and efforts to raise money for new zeppelin construction—similar to what happened following the 1908 crash of the LZ 4—were banned by the Nazi government.
Before the Hindenburg went down, there were other airship crashes, most of them linked to poor weather. The Graf Zeppelin had completed over 1.6 million kilometers—more than a million miles—of travel, including the first full trip around the world by an airship. The company highlighted in its ads that no one had ever been hurt on any of its flights.
-
Read this chapter
Of the 97 people aboard the airship, 35 died in the disaster—13 passengers and 22 crew members, with most survivors suffering severe burns. Among those killed was civilian linesman Allen Hagaman, who died on the ground. Ten passengers and sixteen crewmen died either in the crash or from the fire. Many victims burned to death, while others died jumping from the airship at great height, or from smoke inhalation or falling debris. A few more crew members, passengers, and Hagaman died in the days following, mostly due to their burns.
Most crew who died were in the front of the ship, where many had no clear way out or were near the bow, which stayed aloft and burning too long for most to escape. At least one man was filmed falling from the bow. Most passengers died trapped on the starboard side of the deck. The fire was pushed that way by the wind, and the airship rolled slightly to starboard as it came down, causing much of the upper hull there to collapse outward, blocking escape routes. The sliding door from the starboard area to the central foyer jammed shut during the crash, trapping more people. Still, some did make it out. In contrast, most passengers on the port side survived, with several escaping nearly unharmed. Though this was the most famous airship disaster, it wasn't the deadliest. Just over twice as many died—73 of 76—when the U.S. Navy scout airship crashed at sea off New Jersey on April 4, 1933.
Werner Franz, a 14-year-old cabin boy, was initially stunned when he realized the airship was on fire, but after a water tank above him burst and put out the flames around him, he acted quickly. He went to a nearby hatch, dropped through it just as the front of the ship briefly bounced back into the air, and ran toward the starboard side. He turned around when wind pushed the fire that way and escaped without injury. Franz survived until 2014. The last survivor was Werner G. Doehner, who died November 8, 2019. At the time of the disaster, he was eight years old, vacationing with his family. He remembered his mother throwing him and his brother out of the ship before jumping after them; they lived, but Doehner’s father and sister did not.
When the control car crashed onto the ground, most of the officers leapt through the windows, but became separated. First Officer Captain Albert Sammt found Captain Max Pruss trying to re-enter the wreckage to look for survivors. Pruss's face was badly burned, and he required months of hospitalization and reconstructive surgery, but he survived.
Captain Ernst Lehmann survived the crash with serious burns, including to his head, arms, and most of his back. He was taken to a nearby hospital and died the very next day.
Joseph Späh, the vaudeville acrobat known as Ben Dova, was filming the landing when he noticed the ship was in trouble. He used his movie camera to break the window, and as the airship came down, he let himself out and held onto the ledge. When the ship was about twenty feet from the ground, he released himself and tried to land safely by rolling. He twisted his ankle and was crawling away dazed when a ground crew member picked him up under one arm and ran him clear of the fire. The film he had been shooting survived the disaster.
Of the twelve crewmen in the bow, only three lived through the crash. Four stood on a platform at the very tip of the airship's nose, where the landing ropes and mooring cable were handled. The others were positioned along the lower walkway in front of the control car or on nearby stairway platforms leading up to that same area. As the fire spread, the bow tilted at about forty-five degrees, flames rushing forward through the central passageway like a blowtorch. The survivors—elevatorman Kurt Bauer, cook Alfred Grözinger, and electrician Josef Leibrecht—were farthest back in the section. Bauer and Grözinger happened to be near large triangular vents that pulled in cool air, limiting their burns to minor injuries. Most of those on the stairway either fell into the flames or leaped from the high, unstable airship. Three men on the tip platform were pulled from the wreckage alive; one, rigger Erich Spehl, died later in the Air Station's hospital. The other two—helmsman Alfred Bernhard and apprentice elevatorman Ludwig Felber—were reported by newspapers to have initially lived through the fire but later succumbed at local hospitals during the night or early the next morning.
The Hindenburg disaster happened on May 6, 1937, when the airship caught fire and was destroyed within minutes. The explosion killed 36 people, including passengers and crew. The fire spread rapidly along the airship’s surface, fueled by the hydrogen gas that filled its envelope. Because hydrogen is lighter than air, it rises and burns quickly, making the fire more intense but less likely to cause structural damage compared to a gasoline fire. The disaster marked the end of the airship era, as public confidence in this form of travel was shattered. The event remains one of the most famous aviation tragedies in history.
-
Read this chapter
At the time of the disaster, sabotage was widely suggested as the cause of the fire, first raised by Hugo Eckener, the longtime leader of the Zeppelin Company and known as the "old man" of German airships. In early reports, before examining the crash site, Eckener said a shot might have caused it, referencing threatening letters he had received, though he didn't dismiss other possibilities. Later, he supported the idea that static electricity sparked the disaster—even after the war. While on a lecture tour in Austria, Eckener was woken at around 2:30 a.m. by a call from a New York Times representative in Berlin, who told him the Hindenburg had "exploded yesterday evening at 7 p.m." By the time he left the hotel the next morning to head to Berlin for a briefing, all he could tell reporters was that based on what he knew, the airship had "exploded over the airfield," and sabotage remained a possibility. But as more details emerged—especially that it burned rather than exploded—he became increasingly certain that static discharge, not sabotage, was to blame.
Charles Rosendahl, who led the Naval Air Station at Lakehurst and oversaw the airship's landing, eventually came to think the Hindenburg had been deliberately damaged. He made his case in a 1938 book titled What About the Airship?, which served as both a look back at the airship era and an argument for continuing their development.
Max Pruss, who commanded the Hindenburg from its launch in 1936 until the end of its service, also believed sabotage was responsible for the disaster. He had been flying the Graf Zeppelin since 1928 and was aboard nearly every flight before the Hindenburg began operations. In a 1960 interview with Kenneth Leish of Columbia University’s Oral History Research Office, Pruss recalled that early dirigible travel was safe, which led him to conclude that the crash was not accidental. He noted that both airships had flown through thunderstorms and been struck by lightning on routes to South America but remained unharmed.
Most members of the crew were convinced that sabotage had to come from outside the ship, believing only a passenger could have caused the disaster. Commander Rosendahl, Captain Pruss, and others pointed to Joseph Späh, a German acrobat who survived the fire and had brought his German shepherd, Ulla, as a surprise for his children. Späh was seen making unaccompanied trips to feed his dog in a freight room near the stern. Some stewards recalled that Späh had told anti-Nazi jokes during the flight, and others said he seemed agitated by the repeated delays in landing. His background as an acrobat raised suspicion, since he could have climbed into the airship’s rigging to plant a bomb.
In 1962, A. A. Hoehling released Who Destroyed the Hindenburg?, rejecting all explanations except sabotage and pointing to a crew member as the culprit. He named Erich Spehl, a rigger aboard the Hindenburg who later died from burns in the Infirmary. Ten years later, Michael MacDonald Mooney’s book The Hindenburg, heavily reliant on Hoehling’s theory, also named Spehl as a possible saboteur. That same book was adapted into the 1975 film The Hindenburg, a largely fictionalized version of the Zeppelin’s final journey. The movie’s producers were later sued by Hoehling for plagiarism, though his case was thrown out because he had presented his sabotage theory as historical fact—something that cannot be owned or claimed.
Some have claimed that Adolf Hitler personally ordered the destruction of the Hindenburg as punishment for Eckener's opposition to Nazi beliefs.
Since Hoehling's book, most airship historians have dismissed his sabotage theory because no solid evidence supported it. No bomb fragments were discovered, and there's no proof the battery residue from the wreckage came near the stern. The case against Spehl and his girlfriend fell apart under closer review. It also seems unlikely Rigger Knorr would've stayed at cell 4 without checking the damage Kubis claimed. In an interview, Hoehling himself said it was only his theory and suggested a short circuit might have caused the fire. Mooney's book has been criticized for including fictional elements and factual errors, with some believing the story was crafted for a 1975 film. Though Mooney claims Luftwaffe officers were aboard to investigate a bomb threat, there's no evidence they were there for that reason—military observers had been on previous flights simply to study navigation and weather.
Opponents of the sabotage theory said there was only guesswork to back up the idea that someone had set the airship on fire, and no real proof of sabotage ever came out of the official hearings. Erich Spehl was among those who died in the disaster, so he could not respond to accusations that arose years later. The FBI looked into the matter.
-
Read this chapter
Hugo Eckener believed the airship's fire started when static electricity built up on its surface and created a spark, igniting the hydrogen gas on the outer skin. Those who support this static spark theory say the airship’s construction allowed charge to distribute unevenly. The skin wasn’t properly connected to the duralumin frame; instead, it was separated by non-conductive ramie cords, only lightly coated with metal for better conductivity. This design left a large electrical difference between the skin and the frame, setting the stage for a spark that could ignite the hydrogen.
The Hindenburg was delayed on its transatlantic flight, forcing it through a storm front with high humidity and electrical charge. Though the mooring ropes were dry when they first touched the ground, ignition occurred four minutes later. Heinrich Eckener theorized that during those minutes, the lines may have become wet, grounding the frame but not the skin. This created a sudden difference in electrical potential between the two, leading to a spark. The spark jumped from the skin to the metal framework, igniting leaking hydrogen. In LZ-129 Hindenburg (1964), Zeppelin historian Douglas Robinson noted that although this static discharge idea gained popularity, no one witnessed such a discharge during the 1937 official investigation.
Professor Mark Heald of Princeton, New Jersey, was at the main gate of the Naval Air Station when he and his family watched the Zeppelin approach the mast and drop her bow lines. About a minute later, he noticed what he described as a dim “blue flame” moving along the backbone girder, about one-quarter of the way from the bow toward the tail. He remarked to his wife, “Oh, heavens, the thing is afire,” and she asked, “Where?” He answered, “Up along the top ridge.” Moments after that, a large burst of flaming hydrogen erupted from near the middle of the ship, about one-third the length from the stern. His position on the starboard side, facing the darkening eastern sky rather than the setting sun, would have made the faint static discharge easier to see than other witnesses who viewed the port side.
Harold G. Dick served as Goodyear Zeppelin’s representative at Luftschiffbau Zeppelin in the mid-1930s, flying on test flights of both the Hindenburg and its sister ship, the Graf Zeppelin II. He also made numerous transatlantic crossings in the Hindenburg. In his book The Golden Age of the Great Passenger Airships Graf Zeppelin & Hindenburg, he notes that there were two lesser-known details about the LZ 130, otherwise known as the Graf Zeppelin II. When applying the outer cover, the lacing cord was stretched and passed through dope, but for this airship, the dope included graphite to make it conductive. Dick suggests this detail would have been unnecessary if the static discharge theory had simply been a cover-up. He adds that the use of graphite dope was not made public, and he doubts it was widely known within Luftschiffbau Zeppelin.
During the Graf Zeppelin II's early test flights, engineers like Ludwig Durr measured the airship's static charge and took the static discharge hypothesis seriously. They believed the insulation of the fabric from the frame was a design flaw in the Hindenburg. The German Inquiry concluded that a spark jumping from the outer covering to metal ignited the hydrogen. Lab experiments using the Hindenburg's outer covering and static ignition did ignite hydrogen, but when using the LZ 127 Graf Zeppelin's covering, nothing happened. These findings were not widely publicized, possibly to avoid embarrassment during the Third Reich. A variant of the theory, presented by Addison Bain, suggests a spark between inadequately grounded fabric segments of the Hindenburg itself started the fire, with the doping compound in the skin being flammable enough to ignite before hydrogen contributed. The Hindenburg had a cotton skin covered with "dope," a plasticised lacquer used for stiffness and sealing. In its liquid form, dope is highly flammable, but dry dope's flammability depends on its base constituents. Proponents claim that when the mooring line touched the ground, a spark could have ignited the dope in the skin. However, this theory has been contested.
An episode of the Discovery Channel series Curiosity titled "What Destroyed the Hindenburg?" investigated the static spark theory and St. Elmo's Fire, as well as sabotage by bomb. The team, led by British aeronautical engineer Jem Stansfield and US airship historian Dan Grossman, concluded that the ignition took place above the hydrogen vent just forward of where Mark H.
-
Read this chapter
A. J. Dessler, who once led the Space Science Laboratory at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center and who questioned the paint theory, thought the fire had a simpler cause: lightning. Like other aircraft, the Hindenburg had been struck before during its service. Normally, lightning wouldn't start a fire in a hydrogen-filled airship because there's no oxygen to support combustion. But fires have happened when lightning hits an airship as it releases hydrogen to prepare for landing. That vented hydrogen mixes with atmospheric oxygen, forming a flammable mixture. The Hindenburg was releasing hydrogen at the time of its crash. Witnesses didn’t see any storms during the final approach.
-
Read this chapter
On the 70th anniversary of the disaster, The Philadelphia Inquirer published an article presenting another theory about what happened. This one came from an interview with Robert Buchanan, a ground crew member who had been a young man working the mooring lines that day.
As the airship neared the mooring mast, a ground crewman observed one of the engines, which had been reversed for a sharp turn, backfire and send out a burst of sparks. Later interviewed by Addison Bain, Buchanan concluded that those sparks had set fire to the airship’s outer skin. Another crew member, Robert Shaw, reported seeing a blue ring behind the tail fin and confirmed he’d also witnessed flames emerging from the engine. Shaw believed that what he saw was hydrogen leaking out and then igniting due to the sparks from the engine.
Eckener dismissed the possibility that an engine backfire could have sparked the disaster, arguing that hydrogen wouldn’t ignite from exhaust sparks alone. He pointed out the ignition temperature for hydrogen is 500°C, while exhaust sparks only reach about 250°C. The Zeppelin Company had also run tests and found that hydrogen never ignited under those conditions. Another key detail was that the fire started at the top of the airship, not near the engine area at the bottom.
-
Read this chapter
While the German investigation dismissed structural failure, the U.S. inquiry took the idea more seriously. The U.S. Board of Commerce report, issued in August 1938, said that it was possible a major structural problem in the airship’s stern could have let hydrogen out by breaking a cell, severing an electrical lead or metal part, and creating a spark. The report also pointed to several witnesses who heard a cracking noise near the stern at or around when the fire first started.
Lieutenant Benjamin May, who was working as Assistant Mooring Officer in the U.S. Navy, was on the 75-foot mooring mast at the Lakehurst Naval Air Station when the Hindenburg came in to land. He said the port side of the airship began to give way before any fire appeared. He heard what sounded like metal cracking just before it happened. According to his account, “the flank was virtually shot out at the area of the outburst and flames seemed to follow this eruption of structure.” A short time later, there was a muffled explosion, and a dart-like flame about thirty feet long came from both the side and top of the ship. The rear section quickly caught fire after that.
Lieutenant Richard Antrim, who was on the mooring mast, said the fabric on the aft port side looked "very loose and fluttering," like an untrimmed sail, stretching from the engine to nearly a quarter of the way to the tail. Boatswain’s Mate Reginald H. Ward, watching the landing party at the port bow, also saw the fabric moving in the upper port section between frames 62 and 77. He noted it hadn’t opened yet when he first saw it, but soon after, a flame about ten feet wide burst up from that area, followed by an explosion. Journalist Alice Hager of the Washington Evening Star described the movement as "rippling." Individually, these reports might seem unclear, but together they show a clear pattern of structural trouble in the upper port stern just before the fire began.
Dr. Hugo Eckener, who had commanded airships and served on the German commission that investigated the disaster, later said the ship's structure might have been weakened by the final landing maneuver. He believed the tight turn put heavy strain on the back end, especially near the stabilizing fins held by shear wires. Evidence from the wreckage supported this idea: rivets linking the aft part of the central passage to the hull had come loose, and all the radial wires in the frame nearest the stern were broken. The Hindenburg had been cleared for passenger travel in 1937 after a year of flying nearly 170,000 miles, during which unseen stress could have built up. Investigators also remembered an earlier problem on March 12, 1936, when the lower fin was damaged. It was thought that small cracks from that incident may have grown past the repair site.
A study by digital imaging historian Phil Lloyd, published in 2025, proposed that a photo taken by 16-year-old Foo Chu might capture the start of structural failure near gas cells 4 and 5 on the Hindenburg’s aft upper hull. Chu took the image around 7:20 p.m. while the airship was beginning its landing, from the visitors’ car park. He later moved to the spectators’ entrance and photographed the ship on fire at 7:25 p.m. This timing suggests the problem existed before flames appeared. The depression in the photo matches testimony about where the collapse happened. The U.S. inquiry’s theory that a localized collapse could have ruptured a gas cell and released hydrogen is plausible. In that scenario, electrical arcing or friction-induced sparking from severed wiring would likely have ignited the hydrogen.
A look at Foo Chu’s image alongside an earlier shot by Arthur Cofod Jr. suggests the airship may have suffered structural damage before it caught fire. While Cofod’s photo shows no signs of trouble, Chu’s reveals a noticeable dent stretching from the front of the port horizontal fin through gas cells 4 and 5 toward the top of the hull—exactly where the first flames and fluttering fabric were spotted. The fabric in the photograph appears stretched and distorted, pointing to possible inward bending of the frame beneath. Loose material in that area might have been influenced by an 8-knot crosswind pushing the Hindenburg westward, possibly causing the wave-like motion reported by Antrim, Ward, and Hager. Gusts reaching up to 20 knots at the airship’s altitude could have further stressed already weakened parts of the structure.
The idea that the Hindenburg disaster might have been triggered by a breakdown in the airship’s upper stern is still being looked into. Experts are considering whether the damage came from the frame being overstressed or from metal fatigue. This theory is part of the ongoing investigation into what went wrong during the famous airship's final flight.
-
Read this chapter
The question of what started the fire remains debated. Many believe an electrical spark sparked the disaster, but there's still disagreement about which part of the airship actually caught fire first. Was it the material covering the vessel, or the hydrogen gas that kept it afloat? That detail is still in dispute among those trying to understand exactly how the flames began.
-
Read this chapter
The most widely accepted explanation for the Hindenburg disaster is that a static spark ignited leaking hydrogen gas. Official investigations found evidence supporting this idea, including the airship’s stern-heavy position before landing, which could have been caused by a hydrogen leak mixing with air inside the envelope. R.H. Ward, a ground crew member, reported seeing the fabric on the upper port side flutter as if gas were escaping, and he said that’s where the fire started. Another man on the mooring mast saw the same fluttering. Photographs show the fire burning in straight lines along the edges of gas cells, not along the continuous skin, suggesting it burned inside the cells. Crew members in the stern actually saw the cells burning.
Eckener thought a broken bracing wire had torn open a gas cell, but others believed an automatic gas valve had stayed open during the final approach, letting gas leak from cell 4. During the airship’s first trip to Rio, a similar problem occurred when an automatic valve got stuck, nearly emptying a gas cell. Gas had to be moved from other cells to keep the ship balanced. Still, there were no reports of valve problems during any other part of the airship’s flights. On the final approach, the instruments showed nothing unusual that would suggest a stuck valve.
Some people who disagreed with this idea said that the hydrogen gas had been mixed with garlic to make leaks smell. But that would only work if there was a leak near someone — the smell would only be noticeable in that small area. Once the fire started, stronger odors would have covered up any garlic scent. No one reported smelling garlic during the flight, and no official papers have ever been found showing that the hydrogen was actually treated with garlic.
Opponents of the theory argue that the fire looked bright red, while hydrogen burns blue when it's visible at all. But many other materials were burning too, so they say the color might have changed. Still, the debate continues over what really caused the crash.
Some of the airshipmen, including Captain Pruss, claimed the ship’s stern heaviness was expected, explaining that aerodynamic pressure would naturally push rainwater toward the rear. This condition was observed minutes before the airship began its final turns for landing—timing that ruled out a snapped wire as the cause. Crew members noted that the weight seemed to be adjusted once the ship came to a stop, after six men were moved to the bow section. The gas cells weren’t pressurized, so a leak wouldn’t have caused the outer cover to flutter, which didn’t appear until seconds before the fire broke out. Still, accounts of how much rain the ship had gathered varied widely.
Several witnesses said there was no rain as the Hindenburg approached until a light shower began minutes before the fire, though crew members recalled the ship had already been through heavy rain earlier. Albert Sammt, the first officer who handled the stern-heaviness issue by adjusting fuel and moving crew to the rear, at first blamed fuel use but later claimed a hydrogen leak occurred. During the final approach, the rainwater may have evaporated and wouldn’t fully explain the stern-heavy condition, since the airship should have balanced out ten minutes after passing through the rain. Eckener noted that the stern heaviness was so strong it required 70,000 kilogram-meter (506,391 foot-pounds) of trimming to correct.
-
Read this chapter
In 1996, retired NASA scientist Addison Bain introduced the incendiary paint theory, or IPT, suggesting that the Hindenburg disaster was caused by the airship’s canvas skin, not the hydrogen gas. Bain argued that the doping compound used on the fabric was the source of the fire, and that the ship would have burned even if it had been filled with helium instead. The theory focuses on how the ignition started and how the flames spread, not on where most of the fuel came from. Once the fire began, hydrogen clearly contributed to the blaze, though some IPT supporters claim it burned much later or didn’t help the fire spread as quickly. According to this hypothesis, the main factor in starting and feeding the fire was the canvas skin itself.
Some believe the Hindenburg burned because of the paint on its skin. The fabric's coating included iron oxide and aluminum-impregnated cellulose acetate butyrate, or CAB, which can remain reactive even after drying. These materials are used in solid rocket fuel and thermite. For example, the Space Shuttle’s solid rocket booster used aluminum as fuel and iron oxide as a catalyst. The paint on the Hindenburg didn’t have enough oxidizing agents to function like rocket fuel, but oxygen from the air was present.
Bain got permission from the German government to look through their records and found proof that scientists working under the Nazi regime had figured out the paint on the Hindenburg’s fabric skin caused the fire. He spoke with the widow of Max Dieckmann, the lead scientist on the investigation. She said her husband told her about this conclusion and told her to keep it quiet, likely because it would have made the Nazi government look bad. Dieckmann also believed it wasn’t the paint's flammability that sparked the blaze, but rather its poor ability to conduct electricity, which led to a buildup of static that ignited the hydrogen.
Otto Beyersdorff, an independent investigator hired by the Zeppelin Company, claimed the airship’s outer skin was flammable. To test this, Bain ignited the fabric on camera using open flames and a Jacob's Ladder machine. Critics argued that the setup didn’t match real atmospheric conditions, since Bain had to align the fabric perfectly with a continuous electric current. In response, the IPT suggested that a spark would need to run parallel to the surface, and proposed “panel-to-panel arcing” as the cause. Astrophysicist Alexander J. Dessler countered that static electricity wouldn’t provide enough energy to ignite the doping compound, and noted that the insulating qualities of the compound prevent such a spark path. He also pointed out that in wet and damp conditions, the skin would be electrically conductive.
Critics point to accounts from witnesses on the port side of the field, as well as crew members in the stern, who reported seeing a glow inside Cell 4 before any visible fire broke out of the airship’s skin. This suggests the fire may have started inside the structure or that, after hydrogen ignited, an invisible flame fed on the gas cell material. Newsreel footage supports this, clearly showing flames burning inside the airship's framework.
Some say the fire started on the starboard side, pointing to witness testimony, including Bain, who claimed it began behind the tail fins and moved forward before being seen by people on the port side. But early photos show the entire rear section of the airship already in flames, with no glow visible through the unburned fabric areas. Upward spewing gas inside created low pressure, allowing outside air pressure to push the skin inward.
The Hindenburg’s varnish has sometimes been mistaken for cellulose nitrate, a material that burns quickly and easily. But the actual substance used was cellulose acetate butyrate, or CAB, which is considered combustible but not flammable—it will burn if exposed to fire but doesn’t ignite on its own. Not all of the airship’s fabric burned during the disaster. For instance, the tail fins on the port and starboard sides were largely untouched. This fact challenges the idea that an explosive dope caused the blaze, since the material far from the hydrogen fire did not burn at all.
The TV show MythBusters tested the idea that the Hindenburg's paint caused the disaster. They found the aluminum and iron oxide in the airship’s skin were flammable but not enough on their own to destroy it. The skin would have been too heavy if it contained enough metal for pure thermite. The team also learned the coated skin had a higher ignition temperature than untreated material, burning slowly at first but speeding up over time, with signs of a thermite reaction. They concluded that those who said the skin couldn’t form thermite might have been wrong, since the compounds could have mixed. Still, the skin alone burned too slowly to explain how fast the fire spread. The MythBusters believed the paint may have helped cause the disaster, but it wasn’t the only reason for such quick combustion.
-
Read this chapter
Although Captain Pruss thought the Hindenburg could handle sharp turns without harm, others like Hugo Eckener doubted its strength after repeated stress throughout its flights. The airship wasn't regularly checked, even though earlier trips showed damage. During its first return from Rio, it lost an engine and nearly crashed over Africa. Eckener then ordered inspections during flight, but the ship's complexity made it hard to spot all flaws. In March 1936, before taking off on a broadcast trip, Ernst Lehmann chose to launch the Hindenburg with the wind behind it instead of in front. The takeoff caused the tail to hit the ground and break part of the lower fin. That damage was fixed, but the impact may have harmed internal parts. Only six days before the disaster, plans were made to attach a hook to carry aircraft—similar to how the U.S. Navy used the USS Akron and USS Macon—but trials failed when the biplane struck the Hindenburg's trapeze multiple times. The structure might have been weakened by that.
The Hindenburg made sharp turns before crashing, with some believing these movements caused structural weakness near vertical fins, potentially snapping a bracing wire and puncturing an internal gas cell. One wire tested after the crash broke at only 70% of its rated load, indicating it might have been substandard. Once punctured, hydrogen leaked into the air and could have ignited from static discharge or sparks caused by the broken wire striking a girder. Onboard, people reported hearing what sounded like an explosion, while a ground crew member on the starboard side heard a crack—possibly from a bracing wire snapping. Eckener concluded pilot error was most likely, holding Captains Pruss and Lehmann, and Charles Rosendahl responsible for what he saw as a rushed landing under poor weather conditions. Pruss made the turn under Lehmann's pressure; Rosendahl called the airship in for landing, believing the conditions were suitable. Eckener noted that a smaller storm front followed the thunderstorm front, creating conditions ripe for static sparks.
During the US inquiry, Eckener testified about his theory for what happened. He said the ship, while making a sharp turn to land, created extreme tension in its rear sections, especially near the stabilizing fins held by shear wires. He imagined one of those wires could have broken, leading to a tear in a gas cell. If that happened, the gas would have leaked upward into the space between the outer covering and the cells toward the back of the ship. What observers reported afterward fits this scenario: the escaping gas filled that area and was then ignited by a static spark.
Under these conditions, the gas trapped between the gas cells and the outer cover would have been rich, meaning not an explosive mix of hydrogen but closer to pure hydrogen. The loss of gas must have been significant. The necessary trimming moments to keep the ship balanced were large, and everything seems to have happened in the final five or six minutes—during the sharp turn before landing. That suggests there was a rich or even pure gas up there. Such gas doesn’t explode; it burns slowly, especially in the enclosed space between the outer cover and the cells. Only when the gas cells themselves started burning off this gas would the volume of escaping gas increase, leading to the explosions reported later by many witnesses.
After considering everything I’ve heard, I believe I can offer one possible account of what happened. The unusual weight felt at the stern during the final moments of the flight was already present thirty minutes before landing. That timing rules out a sudden gas leak caused by a sharp turn, since such an event would have had to occur much earlier to explain the symptoms observed so close to touchdown. This detail is key in understanding how the disaster unfolded.
-
Read this chapter
A 2001 documentary titled Hindenburg Disaster: Probable Cause reported that 16-year-old Bobby Rutan claimed to have smelled “gasoline” near the airship’s aft port engine, suggesting a diesel fuel leak. Commander Charles Rosendahl did not take the boy’s account seriously during the investigation. The flight had already experienced a broken fuel pump the day before the disaster, though the chief engineer stated it had been fixed. That diesel vapor, along with overheated engines, would have created a dangerously flammable environment capable of self-combustion.
-
Read this chapter
The question of how the fire spread so quickly along the length of the airship remains central to understanding what happened. Debate has focused on the fabric covering and the hydrogen gas used for lift. No matter where the fire started or what fuel fed it, the real mystery lies in how it moved so fast through the structure. The airship's outer skin and its hydrogen-filled cells were at the heart of the controversy over how the flames spread so rapidly.
The debate over what caused the Hindenburg disaster centers on two main theories: one blaming the airship’s flammable paint, the other pointing to its hydrogen gas. Both sides agree that the fabric covering likely helped the fire spread quickly. Hydrogen burns nearly invisibly in daylight, since most of its light output is in ultraviolet wavelengths, which human eyes can’t see. But black-and-white cameras of the time were more sensitive to those same ultraviolet rays, capturing a different picture than what people observed with their own eyes. So while hydrogen itself may not have been visible, the materials around it—especially if they were flammable—would have changed how the fire looked and spread.
The flames appeared to move down the airship’s surface, even though fires typically burn upward—especially fires fueled by hydrogen. The intense heat radiating from the blaze likely caused the fire to spread across the entire outer skin of the ship. This explains why the flames seemed to travel downward. At the same time, burning pieces of the airship broke away and fell, creating additional streaks of fire moving in that direction.
Some people who doubt that the airship was covered in flammable paint point to recent technical studies. These papers say that even if the Hindenburg had been painted with real rocket fuel, it would have taken many hours to burn completely. But the actual disaster lasted only thirty-two to thirty-seven seconds. That fast burn time challenges the idea that the ship went down because of its paint.
Modern experiments using materials similar to those on the Hindenburg have challenged the idea that the airship's fabric alone could have caused the fire. These tests suggest it would have taken around forty hours for the ship to burn completely if the flames were driven only by the fabric and its coating. Two scientific papers also strongly reject that theory. Still, the MythBusters Hindenburg special appeared to show that while hydrogen was the main factor, the burning fabric did play a role—differences in how each material burned are visible in the original footage.
The most convincing evidence against the idea that the Hindenburg was sabotaged comes from the actual photographs of the crash and from other airships that didn’t use aluminum powder but still exploded with great force. When one gas cell bursts, it sends out a shock wave and intense heat. That wave can tear open nearby bags, which then explode too. A clear example happened on January 5, 1918, when an explosion in one hangar caused the destruction of airships in three adjacent hangars, destroying all five Zeppelins at the base.
After the aft section of the airship erupted and hot gases rushed out through the top, images reveal the rear fabric remained mostly whole. Outside air pressed in on the weakened structure, causing the sides to cave inward as internal pressure dropped from the escaping combustion products.
The airship's tail touched the ground as its rear section broke away, still joined at the front, and the fire spread primarily through the axial gangway, acting like a chimney. Flames rushed along this path, erupting from the nose as the craft settled. One of the most iconic images of the disaster captures that final, explosive moment.
-
Read this chapter
The crash site of the Hindenburg is at the Lakehurst Naval air station, now part of Joint Base McGuire–Dix–Lakehurst. A bronze plaque marks where the airship's gondola came to rest, surrounded by a chain-outlined pad. The memorial was dedicated on May 6, 1987, exactly 50 years after the disaster. The hangar where the airship was meant to dock still stands; it was named a National Historic Landmark in 1968. Tours are offered through the Navy Lakehurst Historical Society for those who wish to visit the site.
Read
Free to download, keep and share. For general information only — not professional medical, legal or financial advice. Please consult a qualified professional.