Dirigibles, Zeppelins, and Blimps:
The Differences Explained

German Navy Zeppelin L-13 (LZ-45).  Drawing by Norbert Andrup.

German Navy Zeppelin L-13 (LZ-45). Drawing by Norbert Andrup.

What is a Dirigible?

Poster for the 1931 Frank Capra film "Dirigible"

Poster for the 1931 Frank Capra film “Dirigible”

A dirigible is any lighter-than-air craft that is both powered and steerable (as opposed to free floating, like a balloon).  Blimps like the Goodyear blimp, rigid airships like the Hindenburg, and semi-rigid airships like the Zeppelin NT are all dirigibles.

The word “dirigible” is often associated with large rigid airships, but the term does not come from the word “rigid” but rather the French verb diriger (“to steer”).

What is a Rigid Airship?

A rigid airship has a framework surrounding one or more individual gas cells, and maintains its shape by virtue of its rigid framework and not the pressure of its lifting gas.

USS Shenandoah under construction

USS Shenandoah under construction, showing rigid framework, individual gas cells, and fabric covering

The photograph to the left of the United States Navy airship USS Shenandoah under construction shows its rigid metal framework; a partially inflated gas cell; and the fabric covering applied over the frame to protect the gas cells and provide aerodynamic streamlining.

Count Ferdinand von Zeppelin is considered the father of the rigid airship but not all rigid airships are “zeppelins.”

What is a Zeppelin?

A zeppelin is a rigid airship manufactured by a particular company, the Luftschiffbau Zeppelin of Germany (the “Zeppelin Airship Construction Company”), which was founded by Count Ferdinand von Zeppelin.

The LZ-129 Hindenburg was a zeppelin; “LZ” stands for “Luftschiff Zeppelin” and the Hindenburg was the 129th airship designed by the Zeppelin Company. The American naval ships USS Akron and USS Macon may also be referred to as zeppelins since they were built by the Goodyear-Zeppelin joint venture.

The term zeppelin is especially associated with the German airships that conducted bombing raids during World War I; while most of these ships were in fact built by the Zeppelin Company, the German military also used rigid airships of very different design which were not “zeppelins” and which were built by the Schutte-Lanz and Parseval companies.

What is a Blimp?

A blimp (technically called a “pressure airship”) is a powered, steerable, lighter-than-air vehicle whose shape is maintained by the pressure of the gases within its envelope.  A blimp has no rigid internal structure; if a blimp deflates, it loses its shape.

The author's son excited about a ride in one of the Lightship Group's blimps.

Blimps are best known today for their role as advertising and promotional vehicles.  Goodyear began using blimps to advertise their brand in 1925, and The Lightship Group has operated promotional blimps for various companies over the past 20 years.  But blimps have also played an important role in the armed forces of many countries.  For example, United States Navy’s lighter-than-air program made extensive use of blimps from the 1920s through the 1950s, primarily in anti-submarine and reconnaissance roles.

Was the Hindenburg a blimp?

The Hindenburg is often called “blimp” but that is not correct; Hindenburg was a rigid airship which maintained its shape by means of a metal framework, and not from the pressure of the gas within its hull.

What is a Semi-Rigid Airship?

Semi-rigid airship Norge

Semi-rigid airship Norge

A semi-rigid airship, like a blimp, maintains its aerodynamic shape from internal gas pressure, but it has a partial rigid frame, usually in the form of a keel, which supports and distributes loads and provides structural integrity during maneuvering.

The modern Zeppelin NT, such as the one that carried the Farmers Insurance logo for a while, is a semi-rigid airship rather than a blimp.

Other famous semi-rigid airships from history include the Norge (of polar explorer Roald Amundsen) and the Italia (of Umberto Nobile).

What was that “Farmers Airship” thing?

Dirigible? Blimp? Zeppelin?

The so-called “Farmers blimp” was not a blimp but a zeppelin, since it was built by the German company that created the Hindenburg and the zeppelin warships of World War I.

The “Farmers Airship” was a Zeppelin NT named Eureka which belonged to the now-defunct  California company Airship Ventures, and the Farmers logo was part of a paid advertising agreement.  The ship previously advertised the Disney film “UP” and the personal genetics company 23andMe.

Be Sociable, Share!

    { 56 comments… read them below or add one }

    Jonathan Jones January 21, 2014 at 9:49 am

    What are the obsticals in building a 1000 ft. Airship??

    Reply

    Dan February 2, 2014 at 5:50 am

    Money. And common sense. :-)

    Reply

    Paul Grosscup July 8, 2013 at 3:24 pm

    I have a Modelpower model of a U.S.Navy blimp marked on side as “U.S.Navy SP-12″. Information that came with the model was that “SP-12″ helped sink the last German sub of WW2. I have a half dozen books on airships, but none of them classify a “SP-12″. Can anyone help me “SP-12″. Paul

    Reply

    john caldwell June 22, 2013 at 2:58 pm

    To Dan
    From John Caldwell
    June 22, 2013
    After you showed a picture of Lindbergh I suggested that you tell a little about the earlier amazing Harriet Quimby, who was the first licensed U.S. female pilot (about 1910) and the first woman to fly over the English Channel, it was solo also, and she landed safely on the French shore. Unfortunately, the Titanic sunk at the same time, getting all the press, and that is why she is not well known.

    Reply

    Bill Kincheloe January 9, 2013 at 6:47 pm

    I have been fascinated with LTA since that August day in 1929 (just before my fourth birthday) that a great, gray “thing” flew overhead. It was, I later learned, the Graf Zeppelin making a turn near St. Louis, Missouri, as it was headed for Lakehurst on one leg of its ’round the world trip. That started my interest in aviation and I would plead for trips to the local airport (Lambert Field) and nearby Scott Field, an Army Air Corps installation. There was a huge (to a boy) hangar at Scott Field where the Air Corps kept some TC- blimps. One summer Sunday (I can’t remember the year) the blimps were crowded to one side as a zeppelin with Navy markings occupied center stage (the Los Angeles?). I have tried to keep up with LTA, reading everything I could find about Santos Dumont to the Zeppelin-NT. But one fact (at least) has eluded me. How did the smaller non-rigids end up beong called “BLIMP?” Many books and articles claim that their interpretation is THE one. One, however, does make a little sense but I can’t verify it either: “British classifications of airships in 1909 included three classes” A-rigid, B-non-rigid and C-free balloons” If that be so and if ”limp’ is linguistically ‘non-rigid,’ it is easy to suppose that the non-rigid airship of Class B would be designated B-limp (considering British humor!). B-limp would have a pleasant sound if the hyphen wasn’t pronounced when an order was issued (“Bring the blimp over.” is easier than “Bring the bee limp over.” Any authoritative answers out there?

    Reply

    Charles H. Atkinson May 9, 2012 at 12:08 am

    A blimp is a tethered non steerable lighter than air vessel used during WWI for spotting enemy submarines. The name came from their being spotted as a blimp on the horizon. The zeppelin was a internal and external framed dirigible with gas bladders. The Goodyear airship is not a blimp but is a dirigible with a rigid center frame surrounded by a gas bladder. Does anyone study history to get their answers anymore?

    Reply

    Dan December 30, 2012 at 10:03 am

    Blimps are not tethered; they are powered and steerable dirigibles that maintain their shape from the pressure of the gas inside their envelopes. The Goodyear blimps were and are blimps, with no rigid framework. (But the next generation of Goodyear airships, which are not yet in service, will be Zeppelin NT ships.)

    Reply

    Thomas Vincente Cortellesi February 28, 2013 at 10:48 pm

    You Dont. If the Goodyear Blimps were rigid, they would look like it. they look like oblique, extrapolated baloons.

    Reply

    gary johnson April 3, 2012 at 6:39 pm

    Can you id the airship that flew overhead today, 4/3/2012 in plainsboro,nj? It was all white, said U.S. Navy along the underbelly and flew the American flag off the rear.

    Reply

    Dan (Airships.net) May 2, 2012 at 3:54 pm
    Ron April 2, 2012 at 7:19 pm

    Moffett field near San Jose, CA has the huge hangar still there from when the U.S.S. Macon used it. There is also some limited LTA activity!

    In 2001 I saw a dirigible (maybe it could have been a blimp) flying low over Soledad, CA probably on its way to Moffett Field. If it was a blimp, it was one darn BIG one! I was THRILLED to see it flying so low. It sure made a lasting impression on me! It seemed fairly “fast” because it flew over the town fairly in a minute or two. It must have been at full speed.
    To my surprise, the engines of this machine were NOT SILENT as I had read about the raids of the Zeps. (I suppose “silent” for airships is a relative term). The noise of the engines was what caught my attention to look up and see the airship. I am still thrilled that I got to see an airship flying so low overhead! It is a sight that one will remember for a long time!

    Reply

    Josiah Wagener January 24, 2012 at 12:25 am

    This isn’t directly about airships but somewhat related. When I was in high school I had a chemistry teacher who had worked for Ball Aerospace during the Cold War. He had been developing a system to very rapidly inflate a large balloon mounted on a ballistic missile. The idea was that in the immediate aftermath of a nuclear war when most communications systems had been knocked out there would be a few of these special missiles in silos here and there which could be launched. When the missile reached the top of its arc in the upper atmosphere it would deploy the balloon which had to be able to inflate in just a few seconds and carry a heavy payload of radio repeater equipment, ELF antenna, and long life batteries. The systems were supposed to provide a temporary communications link for remaining military command sheltered in their bunkers. I think that he said that they were using some sort of exotic lift gas, not helium, but I don’t remember if he said what it was. I also don’t know whether system was ever developed to a deployable point or if it remained only experimental. He said that that was still classified.

    Reply

    Nehmo Sergheyev May 10, 2012 at 8:03 pm

    “…they were using some sort of exotic lift gas, not helium…”
    The only possible lift gases are hydrogen and helium. Hydrogen would be appropriate when the chances of ignition are low.
    And why bother to use a missile-stage for this vehicle? Why not simple inflate the balloon while on the ground?
    `~- Nehmo

    Reply

    Josiah Wagener May 16, 2012 at 1:20 pm

    I think that the idea was to have it into position in the upper atmosphere in a matter of minutes when needed. This is just my recollection of conversations with a teacher about 15 years ago. He definitely said that the purpose of his project was to rapidly deploy a balloon for a radio repeater from the top of the arc of a ballistic missile. The rest of the details I may not remember properly.

    Reply

    Tristan May 21, 2012 at 8:25 am

    “The only possible lift gases are hydrogen and helium”?! What?! Whoever told you that was either lying or displaying ignorance of basic physics.

    Air has a density around 1.2 kg/m3 (varying slightly with humidity, temperature, pressure, etc.). Balloons, airships, etc. work because they have an overall density lower than the air around them. They rise like bubbles in water, and for the same reason.

    The goal is to build a structure with an overall density lower than about 1.2 kg/m3. Hydrogen and helium are far from the only ways to achieve this; they are merely the most convenient, since they have very low density while applying atmospheric pressure to the inside of the balloon so it can be made very light.

    Ever heard of hot air balloons? Heating any gas causes it to expand (i.e. causes its density to decrease), so hot air is less dense than cool air, and can be used as a lifting gas.

    There is no strict physical requirement for the buoyancy to actually be provided by a gas–the reasons for that come from chemistry, not physics. If a solid material with a density less than air could be obtained, it would work for a lighter-than-air craft. “Lighter than air” is exactly what it says, and is the only requirement.

    A vacuum would provide lift, since by definition it has a density of zero. The problem is that it also (by definition) has a pressure of zero, and air has a pressure rather higher than that, high enough to make structures capable of withstanding it (without the aid of equivalent pressure from inside) awkwardly heavy.

    The following gases all have slightly more than half the density of air (and thus give, to a very rough approximation, half the lift per volume that hydrogen does), and will therefore work as lifting gases: methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), water vapor (H2O), and neon (Ne).

    Nitrogen is also lighter than air–not much lighter, since air is mostly nitrogen and the oxygen is only slightly heavier, but still potentially capable of lifting a suitably large and light balloon.

    Prototype balloons during the 1800s, while the technology was still being developed, often used “coal gas,” a mixture of substances, most prominently hydrogen and carbon monoxide, that has since been supplanted by the safer natural gas (mostly methane). From what I have been able to find about it, coal gas also had a density around half that of air.

    For the experimental radio balloon: if it didn’t use hydrogen or helium then my first guess would be ammonia. It is a gas under normal room conditions, but can be stored as a liquid at room temperature and somewhat higher pressure (it shares this trait with, most prominently, propane).

    Reply

    Vlastimil Čech January 22, 2013 at 11:22 am

    I heard of artifical, no-flamanable lifting gas. It was made from methane and some of hydrogen atom was changed by fluorine… CH3F or CH2F2… is it true? Is it possible?

    Reply

    Rob Britt November 17, 2011 at 10:29 am

    My father was at Lakehurst when the tragedy occurred. it is sad I didn’t learn of this until after his death, so I never heard his first hand account. He was 18 at the time and I often wonder how that impacted his life decisions. He joined the Army Air Corp and later made the transition to the Air Force and retired after 30 plus years.

    Just from the pictures on their site, I would guess the Zeppelin company is now making semi-rigid airships rather than dirigibles?

    Reply

    Craig Simpson November 3, 2011 at 1:26 pm

    You write “a zeppelin is a rigid airship…” and “the modern Zeppelin (Farmers) NT … is a semi-rigid airship” and, finally, “the so-called ‘Farmers blimp’ is … a zeppelin”.

    If a zeppelin is rigid and the Farmers ship is semi-rigid, then it’s not a zeppelin according to your definition. Your third statement is, therefore, contradicts the two previous statements.

    Reply

    Dan (Airships.net) November 20, 2011 at 11:30 am

    Since the NT is built by the Zeppelin company, it would be hard to say that it’s NOT a zeppelin. :-)

    Reply

    Craig Simpson December 13, 2011 at 11:39 pm

    The contradiction stands.

    Reply

    Hendrick Stoops December 22, 2011 at 5:33 pm

    Actually, Dan is correct in his statement that the NT is a Zeppelin considering several facts: As said before, NT is built by the Zeppelin company thus it is a Zeppelin ( a Boeing rocket is still a Boeing even if they make planes). Also, the official designation of the craft in question is the Zeppelin NT-07. The confusion between blimps (pressure ships), rigid zeppelins, and semi-rigid zeppelins is because the name Zeppelin has become synonymous with rigid airships as well as the fact that Zeppelin never built non-full rigids before the NT. Also, ships like the R-100,R-101, and the Norge were not referred to as Zeppelins (or Zepps:) ). In case you’re wondering, the ZR-1 (U.S.S. Shenandoah) ZRS-4 and ZRS-5 (U.S.S. Akron and U.S.S. Macon) had the Z (standing for Zeppelin) in their names because the Shenandoah was based heavily off a German war-era airship, And the Akron and Macon were built by Goodyear with a liaison to the Zeppelin Company (or to be proper, Luftschiff Zeppelin G.m.b.H.). The ZR-4 Los Angeles had the Z designation because it was built in Friedrichshafen by the Zeppelin Co.

    Reply

    Craig Simpson January 14, 2012 at 2:12 am

    Dan says, “Since the NT is built by the Zeppelin company, it would be hard to say that it’s NOT a zeppelin” and Hendrick seconds that. Well, I doubt that Zeppelin only makes zeppelins. Are you saying anything they make is a zeppelin?

    Kodak was synonymous with cameras. They now make printers. According to your logic, their printers are cameras?

    Additionally, to simplify the three statements Dan wrote: 1) a zeppelin is a rigid airship, 2) the NT is semi-rigid, 3) the NT is a zeppelin. There is a contradiction there.

    Hendrick also states zeppelins may be either rigid or semi-regid. So, Hendrick’s implication is that Dan’s first statement should be modified.

    Wes Reddish January 15, 2013 at 7:26 pm

    replying to Craig, below

    No, Kodak’s printers are not cameras, they are Kodaks, which is the point. Anything Ford makes is a Ford, anything Maytag makes is a Maytag, anything Zeppelin makes is a Zeppelin.

    niccolas March 17, 2014 at 9:29 pm

    *read the paragraph about the farmers airship, It states that it was a zeppelin, because it was made by the zeppelin company. END OF CONVERSATION!

    George F. Hope August 30, 2011 at 3:17 pm

    Not all rigid airships need a framework. A rigid airship is an airship which can keep it’s shape even if its deflated. ZMC-2 for example was rigid for its metal skin and not a frame

    Reply

    Hendrick Stoops December 22, 2011 at 5:35 pm

    I’m not sure if the ZMC-2 was ever classified, but as you said, it was likely rigid.

    Reply

    George W. Allen April 13, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    Dan,

    I am one of the 5 airship pilots to be selected to conduct the BIS trials for the ZPW 3W from 1958-1960. I was the second president of the Naval Airship Association. Our membership is open to anyone who has an interest in Lighter-than-air. Our web is http://www.naval-airships.org membership forms are located there.
    I remember Gillen. How do I get a hold of him? You may send him my e-mail.

    Reply

    nelson shaffer May 11, 2011 at 10:14 am

    We are interested in using blimps, and UAV for geologic and mining purposes, especially exploration, monitering, and reclamation. Any suggestions you can offer will be appreciated.
    SHAFFERN

    Reply

    Fred April 5, 2011 at 3:21 pm

    A friend born in Ocean County around the turn of the century once told me that Lakehurst was selected as the lighter-than-air base because it seemed to have LESS THAN ITS SHARE OF STORMS than other areas near NYC. My personal experience living in the Toms River area seems to bear this out. I see more storms to the north and south. Watching weather radar, the “red” in storms approaching the center of NJ usually moderate. Can you comment?

    Reply

    LuAnne June 27, 2011 at 2:39 pm

    I’d have to agree with you. I live in point pleasant and we really only gets storms once in a while. Personally, I love the weather here.

    Reply

    Charles Bryant April 4, 2011 at 5:04 pm

    Dear DWM and all others:

    Here in Ocala, FL, there was an article about the MZ-3A in the local newspaper the Ocala Star Banner. If you plug in the name, “Ocala Star Banner” on your web browser, it should bring you to their web site, then search for MZ-3A and it will pull up the piece. This particular airship has been making the run from Lakehurst, NJ down here to Dunnellon, FL for some time now where it finds it’s Winter home. No, she’s no giant, but as an airship, and a piece of aviation history from a bygone era, we’ll take her any way we can!

    So, the next time you find your way to this part of the country, do yourselves a favor and look this piece of Florida up on your road map. Part of the whole reason the MZ-3A has it as her “2nd home” is it’s location which is ideal for her.

    Reply

    Jammy January 28, 2011 at 3:12 pm

    I have a second year design project where we are asked to design an un-manned aerial vehicle UAV ( i.e A HOVERING ROBOT ) that can make controlled take-off,hover and land actions.

    The robot should be either a blimp or zepplin. Which one do you think is better for this case ?

    Reply

    Charles Bryant April 4, 2011 at 4:49 pm

    If you’re designing a project that is supposed to be a UAV, then payload/lift considerations will be a prime factor in your decision. While the difference is undoubtedly neglible when moving between a rigid(zeppelin) type of airship versus a non-rigid(blimp) type of airship design. That notwithstanding, since you’re next consideration is control, all things undoubtedly being equal between the two, I would favor the lighter of the two and also the easier of the two to design(less fabrication to deal with). Given these parameters, since lift will be determined by weight and control will be no doubt be roughtly equivalent using either design, the so-called “blimp” or non-rigid format would be preferable.

    Reply

    Clark Plummer January 25, 2011 at 2:45 pm

    Can anyone help me ? When my father was young in Alameda, Calif. he remembers seeing aircraft taking off of a Dirigible. Could this be possible ? Mom wants to know. No landings – just take offs. Thanks

    Reply

    Dan (Airships.net) January 25, 2011 at 6:17 pm

    Yes; take a look at the photos on this page:

    Reply

    tom December 13, 2010 at 11:40 pm

    why are the rigid airships gone?

    Reply

    Charles Bryant April 4, 2011 at 4:54 pm

    Airships undoubtedly fell out of favor due to their slow travel speeds versus those achieved by more advanced fixed wing/heavier than air craft and probably the memory of the Hindenburg disaster at Lakehurst, NJ when she burst into flames. Too, given the cost of the gasses(during the war that followed) used to give LTA craft their lift a culmination of these factors proved to be the death knell of lighter than air travel as it once was known.

    Reply

    Robert Hoffman September 27, 2010 at 9:27 am

    There is an excellent museum in Germany where the Zeppelin plant was located. http://www.zeppelin-museum.de/ Inside they have a section of the living space from a Zeppelin. That is not as close as you were hoping, but may be the only place to view how they were built.

    Reply

    LeChat September 1, 2010 at 4:27 pm

    I’ve been inside of Hangar #1 at Lakehurst Naval Air Station where the Hindenberg was berthed. The place is seriously gigantic inside. There’s a small marker where the Hindenberg went down in the field outside.

    Reply

    Matt October 6, 2010 at 1:39 am

    I’ve been there as well. I believe that at one time that hanger was the largest single room building in the world.

    Reply

    Lou maurio April 1, 2011 at 11:38 pm

    That particular hangar is unique and vast. It creates it s own weather patterns and at times forms clouds and precipitation.

    Reply

    George J. Gillen July 10, 2010 at 7:16 pm

    David, it was great to hear that someone, anyone is still thrilled to talk about the Navy Airship program of the 50s and 60s.
    I flew the ‘Nan’ ship first out of Boca Chica field in Key West Fla. then later from 1959 to 1961 out of Lakehurst NJ. when the Navy started to decommission the whole fleet.
    I have to say it was a thrill to fly 1st Mechanic, (“Flight Engineers,”)
    In the larger ships, model ZPG-3s. We were able was able to fly by interconnecting both 1800 H.P. engines to fly with both 18′ props on 1 engine while we conducted an ‘in flight inspection’ of 1 engine at a time.
    I would like to go on, but I don’t know that anyone is there.
    My e-mail address is made up of gjg, my initials, my combat air crew cac#302.

    Reply

    Stainie May 7, 2010 at 10:19 pm

    In the The Robert Wise film Hindenburg it shows riggers and crew walking about inside the hull. Call me a mong, but surely they can’t be breathing the hydrogen gas, and if they’d filled it with helium, as intended, they’d all sound like the Piglets when they spoke. The hull gets ripped and the riggers go outside, repair the fabric to prevent hydrogen escape and loss of altitude. Can anyone explain?

    Reply

    Dan (Airships.net) May 8, 2010 at 12:06 pm

    Lifting gas was contained in gas cells, so the crew was able to move throughout the hull without being exposed to the lifting gas.

    The repair depicted in the film The Hindenburg (which was based on a real event which took place on the LZ-127 Graf Zeppelin) was not to prevent loss of hydrogen, but to prevent further damage to the fabric which would have compromised the flight controls and the stability of the ship.

    (Incidentally, if you would like to read more about the movie, I wrote a blog post called The Hindenburg (1975) – Fact & Fiction.)

    Reply

    Liz Costa November 1, 2010 at 10:57 am

    Thanks Dan! Very well and simply explained. They often seem to miss details like this in films. :o )

    Reply

    Lou maurio April 2, 2011 at 12:05 am

    While teaching science in the ’70′s, I told the class the hindenberg,s tragedy. The next day my middle school youngster brought in an internal metallic structural piece of this derigible. Apparently it was given to him by his grandfather who barely escaped this fiery ordeal, picked up a piece, burned his hand, and many years later gave this little relic to his grandson. It was a blackened, most likely aluminum, braket-like six in piece. He gave it to me as a present that day. I still have it and treasure this small item immensely

    Reply

    Peter October 31, 2010 at 8:39 pm

    if they’d filled it with helium, as intended, they’d all sound like the Piglets when they spoke.

    to get a squeeky voice you add a few percent helium, not enough to be worthwhile for lift.
    if it was fairly pure helium (or hydrogen) like airship gasbags contain, they would NOT be talking, they would be suffocating within a couple of breaths.

    There have been several helium suffocation fatalities in the USA.

    Reply

    Jerin March 7, 2010 at 1:01 pm

    Would the tiny ZMC-2 enter into your consideration as a footnote in US Navy Rigid Airship article? Or is it much too semirigid-like? Is it simply not interesting enough?

    Reply

    Dan (Airships.net) March 7, 2010 at 2:27 pm

    I wish I had more time to discuss all the fascinating airships and dirigibles of past and present!

    Reply

    Maria Caruana February 20, 2010 at 5:19 am

    Hi Dan,

    First of all this site is very informative and very helpfull. I would like to ask you if you know whether there was a movie made about the hindenburg.

    Thanks a lot

    Reply

    Dan (Airships.net) February 21, 2010 at 4:34 pm

    The most famous film about LZ-129 was the 1975 movie The Hindenburg by Robert Wise, starring George C. Scott and Anne Bancroft.

    Reply

    Adam Saris September 1, 2009 at 11:30 pm

    How long was the German Navy Zeppelin L-13 (LZ-45) and when was it in servies?

    Reply

    Dan (Airships.net) September 1, 2009 at 11:48 pm

    L-13 was a p-type ship with a length of 163.5m (536′ 5″). Its first flight was July 23, 1915, and the ship was commanded by Heinrich Mathy during a famous bombing raid on England. L-13 was dismantled in April, 1917.

    Reply

    Ford U. Ross July 29, 2009 at 11:48 am

    The next big event in LTA circles will be the openning of the Military Museum and Veterans Memorial at NAS Richmond in mid to late 2010. NAS Richmond was the 2nd largest U.S. Navy Blimp base in the U.S. Destroyed by a hurricane and fires in1945. The heart of the site will be the restored original Administration Building
    #25 which will be moved alongside the Railroad Museum on the oridinal site of Hangar #2.

    Reply

    David W. Murray July 14, 2009 at 11:30 pm

    What a wonderful site. I live near Lakehurst, and you will be glad to know that there is still some limited LTA activity there. The small non-rigid MZ-3A has been flying from Lakehurst for a couple of years, not a Top Secret project, but nobody’s talking much about it. In fact, I was earlier today belting down South Dover rd on a Triumph Thruxton, at highly illegal speeds, when she flew over, quite low. I pulled over to watch, as this sight has become a rarity. She’s tiny, even to one too young to have seen the big Rigids, but I remember the “Nan” class ships of the late 50s, which dwarfed her.
    Still, she’s an Airship, and I’ll take what I can get.
    Best,
    DWM
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MZ-3A

    Reply

    Jnr April 29, 2012 at 2:55 pm

    Is it not that the camera and the printer would both be considered “kodaks”?

    Reply

    Leave a Comment