Hindenburg Statistics

Size comparison between LZ-129 Hindenburg and Boeing 747

Size comparison between LZ-129 Hindenburg and Boeing 707

LZ-129 Hindenburg statistics:

  • Length: 803.8 feet
  • Diameter: 135.1 feet
  • Gas capacity: 7,062,000 cubic feet
  • Lift: 511,500 lbs
  • Cruising Speed: 125 km/h (76 MPH)
  • Maximum Speed: 135 km/h (84 MPH)
  • Main Powerplant: 4 Daimler-Benz 16-cylinder LOF 6 (DB 602) Diesels
  • Crew: 40 flight officers and men, 10-12 stewards and cooks
  • Passengers: 50 sleeping berths (1936); 72 sleeping berths (1937)
  • First flight: March 4, 1936
  • Final flight: Crashed, May 6, 1937

Additional specifications and technical details are available on the following pages of this website:

Relative sizes of LZ-11 Viktoria Luise, LZ-120 Bodensee, LZ-127 Graf Zeppelin. and LZ-129 Hindenburg

Relative sizes of LZ-11 Viktoria Luise, LZ-120 Bodensee, LZ-127 Graf Zeppelin. and LZ-129 Hindenburg

caprip

Hindenburg profile, showing major elements and numbering system for gas cells and frames. Drawing courtesy David Fowler. (click to enlarge)

SHARE THIS PAGE

on StumbleUpon, del.icio.us, Facebook, Digg, Reddit, Twitter.

  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • Twitter

{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }

rick V June 18, 2010 at 12:18 pm

In your layouts of the Hindenburg, there are numerous oval-shaped objects along the Keel. Are those storage containers for fuel or something else entirely? I’m also curious as to why the keel did not go all the way to the tail. I was also under the impression that there was a lookout post on the tail. Is that just something that was on American airships or am I off altogether? One last thing, on the vertical lines that are labeled as gas vents, were there also ladders there for crew to be able to go from the keel to the axial corridor, and then up to the top, or is that just Hollywood nonsense? (The Rocketeer) Hope my bombardment with questions isn’t too annoying.

[Reply]

Pete Blair May 1, 2010 at 10:41 am

This site is great.I a was writing a paper about airships and this site was my primary source.

However, i just started having a thought. What if, zeppelins were reintroduced into airtravel, and were fitted with Pratt & Whitney JT9D’s as opposed to propeller engines. Would the zeppelin reach a higher speed, and mabye even replace commercial jets?

[Reply]

Jim Richards January 4, 2010 at 10:37 am

The only thing I either haven’t seen or just plain missed is, what was it’s cruising altitude, generally?

[Reply]

Dan (Airships.net) Reply:

Hindenburg’s cruising altitude is discussed here, on the page about Hindenburg Flight Operations. Thanks for your question!

[Reply]

Amanda January 3, 2010 at 1:27 pm

This website really helped me out. I am doing the Hindenburg for a multi-genre project, and needed more info. This helped me get the info I need. Thanks.

[Reply]

D. Frank Robinson December 29, 2009 at 11:06 am

You have a well done site. I’ll be baaack! for info.

[Reply]

Malcolm Gunstone September 19, 2009 at 8:24 am

I remember seeing a large airship flying in a westerly direction over the Bristol Channel in U.K. at the age of 10 or 11, on a Sunday afternoon in 1936/7.
Is it possible that someone has a flight plan of the course taken on a flight from Frankfurt to New York, which might prove to me that it was the “Hindenburg”?

[Reply]

TonyHolroyd August 31, 2009 at 7:33 am

The Hindenburg was less fuel efficient than a modern jumbo jet. A jumbo jet consumes 16-17litres of fuel per kilometer travelled and carries 420 passengers. The distance between Frankfurt and New York is 6430km. So fuel consumption per passenger is 260kg. The Hindenburg carried 110 people and consumed 32,500kg fuel for the same trip. That is 295kg of fuel per person carried. If we only count the passengers, fuel cost goes up to 450kg each – 70% more than a jumbo jet. When one considers the additional embedded energy in the massive aluminium structure of the airship, it would be a fair estimate to say that total energy cost of a Hindenburg trip across the Atlantic was double that of a modern jumbo. High labour costs involved in operating and docking the ship damaged its economics even further.

Cutting the airship’s speed by 1/3rd would have reduced its fuel consumption by about half. Doubling the length of the ship would have similarly reduced fuel consumption by half.

There is some speculation that high fuel prices will result in a resurgance of the airship. This will only be the case if the new generation of airships are very large, they travel more slowly than Hindenburg and there are considerable reductions in the manning levels required to operate and dock them. Frankly, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

[Reply]

Bryan McFarland Reply:

Just to compare apples to apples (or contemporary technologies), how does the Hindenburg’s consumption figures match up against a Boeing 314, Sikorsky S42, Short Sunderland, or Empire?

[Reply]

Frighteous Reply:

The Hindenburg wasn’t created for economy. It was created by Nazis for propaganda purposes, and to make people aware of what Germans are capable of building and to raise morale in Germany. No other nation had anything comparable to the Hinden. American sources such as Rockefeller and Carnegie funded the birth of Nazi Germany, and along with Henry Ford, more than likely paid for a good piece if not all of the Hindenburg.

[Reply]

Branislav Popkonstantinovic July 20, 2009 at 12:48 am

Some facts that could be interesting:
The Brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) of each Hindenburg’s engine was 0.04 kg/(HP h) (calculated for 4 engines together: 0.16 kg/(HP h) ). Typically, Hindenburg was capable to complete an Atlantic crossing (from Frankfurt to New York) in 60 hours and consume only 32,500 kg of diesel fuel. On her last voyage, Hindenburg completed the Atlantic crossing in 77 hours due to the fact that headwind was very strong and burned 42 tonnes of crude oil. In comparison with modern large aeroplanes, which consumed more than 120 tonnes of cerosine in one single transatlantic voyage, that was highly eficient.

[Reply]

miles May 17, 2009 at 10:49 pm

could you please email me those drawings as well?

Ever since i read the book “Airborn” which is a wonderful book, i have had an odd obsession with zeppelins and anything in relation to them.

Infact, i have created a few modern zeppelin designs myself, that use helium for their main lifting gas and a small gas bag filled with hydrogen located in the tail of the design. as i read on your site about how the zeppelin company would use blaugas as a fuel due to the fact it would not add extra weiht to carry and would not cause the ship o lose mass when burned off, i figured it would work even better if you used hydrogen as a fuel source. the advantage of hydrogen is that it is a lifting gas itself (which you obviously already know) and will contribute to the lift. However, with hydrogen, you could make it in the air as you fly, if you have solar panels on top of the ship to collect energy, you can use the system of electrolosis to split water into hydrogen and oxygen, you can pump the hydrogen into the gas bag and store the oxygen elsewhere to be used n high altitude flying.

This is a wonderful website, and of the other airship/zeppelin based websites i’ve visted, athis one ranks #1 in the amount of pictures and historical data. I’m marking it on my favorites list. very very interesting.

[Reply]

Jadan May 1, 2009 at 1:07 pm

I feel like I hit the mother load of info on airships and the history of the Zeppelin Co. Thank you for all this great stuff! I wanted to know if you have any clear, easy to read plans for any of the later airships, like the Graf or the Hindenburg. I ask because I am working on a short animated 3d film starring a rigid airship, and I really need to know what the flight cabin’s layout and accurate dimensions of the ship overall, so I can ensure historical accuracy of these beautiful giants. If you have any ideas for me, please let me know!

Thanks again for a wonderful site!
Jadan

[Reply]

Dan (Airships.net) Reply:

@ Jadan:

I emailed you detailed drawings of the control car and a profile view. I hope they help!

[Reply]

Leave a Comment

* Your e-mail address will not be made public.

Comments links could be nofollow free.