NOVA new evidence on Hindenburg crash 1937

skyking3286

skyking3286

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Sep 29, 2012
Messages
374
Display Name
Display name:
skyking3286
A nice piece (next week's NOVA is on electrical aircraft and the new designs) on the Hindenberg and a very recently discovered new angle on the crash. This is a side view never seen in public before and while its missing the first few seconds of the fire, it's obvious that the aft section is first to go. The back of the plane broke in half in mid-air, the fire went forward through the crew passageway to the nose area, one bag exploded on the way down. . . and just how filled with electrical energy the whole craft was as the lines hit the ground and became a ground. Things you didn't know as well before this footage came to light:

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/video/hindenburg-the-new-evidence/

What is also worthy of praise is how quickly the cabin crew was starting to drop water out of the front end of the craft and tried to trim it correctly with a deck angle that was nearly 45%. A pretty quick response. If you think of the three second rule for reacting to an engine out, they did pretty good getting things in motion as the Hindenburg pitched up. Just when you think you have seen it all . .

Still shot from the footage:
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertain...-released-footage/ar-BB1gUKEQ?ocid=uxbndlbing

And the NOVA part that has the footage:
 
Last edited:
skyking3286 said:
What is also worthy of praise is how quickly the cabin crew was starting to drop water out of the front end of the craft and tried to trim it correctly with a deck angle that was nearly 45%. A pretty quick response. If you think of the three second rule for reacting to an engine out, they did pretty good getting things in motion as the Hindenburg pitched up. Just when you think you have seen it all . .
Click to expand...

Why would dumping ballast from the forward section be the appropriate reaction to a pitch-up?
 
Thanks skyking for posting that link. I enjoyed watching that whole show.

Giapis’s explanation sounds good to me.

Two conductors: skin and frame. While in flight, the same voltage on both. No problem yet.

Then a rope connected to the frame touches the Earth and gives the frame a different voltage. So the frame is no longer the same voltage as the skin. A spark jumps from skin to frame. At a spot where H2 is leaking.
 
That's a good and interesting presentation.

Though I sorta hoped the Mythbusters had dropped in with a scale-sized replica....
 
My theory is that the reason that they dumped forward ballast because that the Hindenburg was dropping and with the pitch up they figured it was dropping from the tail. They dumped the ballast to lower
the descent rate. When you think of how slow and steady the craft usually flew, the sudden drop and pitch up meant the craft wounded and had to lighten to keep the descent rate low. It would have been
interesting to hear a cockpit recording, with the internal truss snapping and the hydrogen explosions. With all that happening in mere seconds, dumping ballast was the only control they had left.
 
skyking3286 said:
My theory is that the reason that they dumped forward ballast because that the Hindenburg was dropping and with the pitch up they figured it was dropping from the tail. They dumped the ballast to lower
the descent rate. When you think of how slow and steady the craft usually flew, the sudden drop and pitch up meant the craft wounded and had to lighten to keep the descent rate low. It would have been
interesting to hear a cockpit recording, with the internal truss snapping and the hydrogen explosions. With all that happening in mere seconds, dumping ballast was the only control they had left.
Click to expand...
That was my theory too, after thinking about it. They knew that it would descend pretty rapidly after the hydrogen was gone in a whoosh, so they dropped the ballast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top