LTA PATENTS BLOG

Todays patent is the first of Huerttle’s two patents.

The USPTO didn’t include an LTA classification for either 

of his patents despite his titles and assignments to Zeppelin 

and Goodyear-Zeppelin.

    “Rigid airships have a hull structure into which the gas bags are

inserted and over which the shape giving outer cover is stretched.

This outer cover has to sustain considerable stresses resulting

from the air pressure and also from the tension occurring while it is

being fastened to the hull. On the other hand it should be as light

as possible for the purpose of saving useful lift of the airship.

Therefore it is necessary to pay special attention to the way of

distributing the fabric used and to the method of manufacturing

the outer cover.

      According to my invention I use a very light and thin fabric for

the main middle portions of the individual pieces of the outer cover.

The edges of such pieces are reinforced by ribbons or strips of

a much heavier and stronger fabric. Points where extraordinary

stresses occur may be also reinforced by a superposed layer of

an elastic fabric, this elastic fabric having a higher degree of

elongation than the main light fabric. This causes a smooth and

gradual transition of the stresses from the reinforcement to the

main fabric.”

NOTE: The USPTO assigned only one classification 244/132 

(Skin fastening devices), rather than the more appropriate 

244/126 (Airship skin construction).

Huerttle’s innovation was to fabric the skin in manageable sections, 

each section designed to provide maximum strength where needed 

and maintain dimensional stability while minimizing the weight 

of each skin segment. 

N.B. This would have required designing, cutting, and fabricating a 

sizeable number of skin segments of various dimensions to cover the 

hull and fins of the huge Zeppelins planned and under construction. 

Presumably the potential weight savings and reduction in form drag 

would have made the labor investment worthwhile. 

Todays patent is the second of Schutte’s twenty U.S. Patents.

Professor Schutte formed his company with Dr. Lanz, a wood

products manufacturer, in 1909. Schutte-Lanz first airship, 

the SL1 which incorporated many elements of this patent, first flew

 on 1 October 1911. After completing 53 experimental flights, 

the SL1 was delivered to the German Army in December 1912.

      “My invention relates to a balloon construction for air ships 

and has for its object the construction of such a balloon from 

a number of independent inflatable elements, and more especially 

of a number of spherical balloon elements having interposed 

between them inflatable rings of triangular, elliptical or circular 

cross section interposed between spherical balloons and designed 

to fill the spaces between them, the entire structure being assembled 

within a stiffened hull or cover.

NOTE: Schutte's patent claims a rigid, double-walled 

envelope containing multiple spherical gas balloons, the balloons 

separated and held in place by inflatable elements and interwoven 

lattice-work connected to the envelope. Schutte didn't discuss how, 

when, or why the "inflatable rings" were inflated. None of the 

approved claims specify the aerodynamic shape of the envelope, 

or that the gas balloons might be different sizes.

The USPTO failed to cite 244/125 (Airship hull construction),
the subject of Claim 5.

This patent is referenced in three modern patents:

4,032,085 Dirigible, especially non-rigid dirigible,

4,934.631 Lighter-than-air type vehicle,

6,234,425 Release fitting for balloons.

Todays patent is one of Mammen’s two airship patents.

The other (p/n 1,658,238) which was issued that February 

included slightly modified Figures, and fewer claims.

      “My invention relates to a dirigible air ship and has for its object

the provision of a construction formed so as to automatically assist

the lifting medium or gas in raising the ship to the desired altitude;

while at the same time providing a construction which will enable

easy descent and alighting to be made.

      One object of the invention is to provide a construction adapted

to withstand the enormous strains resulting from the high speed

motors, the cargo or weight carried and those resulting from the

continuous landings and upward pulls exerted when the ship

ascends; the invention involving a frame construction which will

be comparatively light while at the same time possessing the

necessary strength and rigidity; being so formed that all strains

and stresses will be transmitted to the trussed keel of the ship.

     Another object of my invention is to provide a construction

which is so formed as to involve the principle of a parachute and

which therefore will permit landings to be made in a more or less

perpendicular or vertical direction so as to relieve the ship from

the usual jars and strains encountered in landing. The parachute

portion of the ship involves controllable means whereby the

parachute effect or air resisting portion may be affected or

manipulated so as to alter resistance to the air currents and thus

place the air ship entirely within the control of the pilot.”

NOTE: Rigid hull designed for water landings, wings, a parachute 

device, and a “vacuum chamber”. The classifier either didn’t read, 

or understand the patent when it was digitized for entry into the 

USPTO Data Base. Only one of the key classifications is assigned. 

Among the missing:

244/25 (Airship with sustaining wings),

244/39 (Variable – sustention),

244/96 (Airship control),

244/97 (Buoyancy varying),

244/98 (Gas bag inflation),

244/100R (Landing gear),

244/125 (Airship hull construction), and

244/128 (Airship gas cell construction and arrangement.

Only one examiner (Galen Barefoot) has cited this patent since

the digital data base was established.

Todays patent was Weidhase’s only LTA Patent.

      “An object of the invention is to provide an airship embodying

a gas container formed in sections which when assembled presents

the appearance of the conventional type of so called cigar-shaped,

or Zeppelin type, each section being divided into a plurality of

independent circumferentially spaced gas containers, each section

being furthermore divided by means of a wall of non-inflammable

material.

       Another object of the invention is to provide in an airship of

the type above described, means for propelling the same, which

means includes a plurality of propellers mounted in a unique

manner whereby the propellers may be directed upward or

downward, independently of each other to raise or lower the

airship, or to the right or left to steer the airship.

      A still further object of the invention, is to provide an airship

having a gas container of a sectional and cellular character

enabling the provision of passage ways, elevator shafts, etc.,

throughout the length of the machine, and vertically to permit

access to every portion of the gas container, and to every

individual cell in its structure for refilling or repair.”

The patent only includes two approved claims:

“1. In an airship, a balloon comprising a plurality of cylindrical

sections placed end to end and having a central tubular wall in

each, defining when the sections are assembled a continuous

passage through the balloon, a wall in each section defining a

pair of compartments, a plurality of radial walls in each

compartment defining independent subcompartments, and a

plurality of supply pipes in the passage having branches

communicating with the subcompartments to supply gas

thereto.

2. In an airship, a balloon comprising separate cylindrical sections

placed end to end and having central tubular walls forming a

passage continuous throughout the length of the balloon, a

vertical tubular passage between adjacent sections, an elevator

movable in each passage, means at the upper end of each passage

for supporting armament, a substructure supported by and beneath

the balloon, a machine containing compartment beneath each

vertical tubular passage supported upon the substructure,

and means in each machine compartment, independently operable

to drive the airship.”

NOTE: Many of the improvements discussed in the text are not 

covered by either of the two approved claims. (Neither text nor the 

claim discuss the size or purpose of the elevators and their shafts, 

or whether these structures are constituent parts of a cylindrical section.)

Weidhase appears to have proposed a novel method of producing a

huge rigid airship, consisting of nearly identical bow and stern sections 

with two or more identical, cylindrical mid-body sections. 

Unfortunately, he doesn’t discuss how the sections are joined; if this 

is for manufacturing convenience or if sections are expected to be 

separated, removed, or replaced for operational or maintenance purposes.

According to the text, the ship’s multiple gas compartments are to be 

filled bringing the ship to near-neutral buoyancy; lift and propulsion

being coordinated via voice commands, by operators in each engine 

room controlling direction and thrust of each propeller. 

Weidhase doesn't indicate a location (bridge, flight deck, etc.) for the 

ships' control station(s).

The USPTO failed to assign several classifications actually covered 

by the claims:

244/56 (Tilting propulsion),

244/96 (Airship control),

244/125 (Airship hull construction),

244/127 (Airship load attachment), and

244/128 (Airship gas cell construction and arrangement).

This is not an APRIL FOOLS joke.

Todays patent, Reissued on 1 April, is one of eighteen patents 

in my LTA Data Base which was issued on the First of April.

This patent is one of ten airship related patents issued to 

“Mr. Rubber”, John R. Gammeter.

Figs. 1 & 4 illustrate a single rudder and double elevator at the

stern, as well as a suspended car with a single tractor propeller.

Not parts of the patent.

     “According to my improved design I provide a sheath 

or envelop composed of very thin strips of ribbons of metal, 

such as steel, closely interwoven and inclosing practically 

the entire gas container, although in the case of dirigibles

and the like, metal caps may be used to complete the envelop. 

Compartments may be formed within the envelop by partitions 

of like material.

      My invention also contemplates novel means for inflating

air ships of the lighter-than-air type.”

NOTE: All twenty-one claims describe a tightly woven envelope 

consisting of thin steel, metal, or other inelastic material; some 

claims specify that this envelope be terminated with solid metal 

end-caps. None claim a means or method of making either the 

envelope or the airship’s internal compartments gas-tight. 

None of the claims mention supplying an LTA gas to one or more 

of the compartments. (That is, improvements were disclosed but 

not claimed.)

The USPTO arbitrarily assigned only one of several secondary 

classifications:

244/98 (Gas bag inflation), but not

244/99 (Gas release), or

244/125 (Airship hull construction), or

244/128 (Airship gas cell construction and arrangement).

Todays patent is the only one of Berry’s eight patents 

which is related to aircraft or airships.

 “This invention relates to aerial navigation machines and 

the main object of the invention is to provide for reducing or 

eliminating the head on resistance at the front of the machine.

     The invention is particularly applicable in connection with 

machines of the dirigible balloon type, and in such connection 

it provides for producing an outward and rearwardly moving 

conical current of the air in front of the balloon, the outward

movement of this air continually removing air from the path 

of the balloon, so as to reduce the obstruction to forward 

movement.

      Another object of the invention is to provide simple and 

effective means for guiding the machine in vertical and 

horizontal planes.

      A further object of the invention is to provide means for 

facilitating the ascent and descent of the machine.”

NOTE: The USPTO only assigned three classifications, all related

to fluid propulsion; it did not cite any LTA classifications.

All five claims apply to an “aerial navigation machine”; but only 

dirigible balloons are discussed in the patent. Claims 2 through 5 

include a BOX RUDDER, “a box rudder surrounding said outlet, 

said box rudder being mounted to swing in vertical and horizontal 

planes, and means for controlling the angular position of said 

box rudder”.

This patent would have surfaced, and might have been cited if the 

USPTO had included appropriate classifications:

   244/29 (Airship and fluid sustained),

   244/88 (Rudders, universally mounted), and

   244/130 (Aerodynamic resistance reducing).

Todays patent is Masterman’s only known U.S. Patent.

     “The invention relates to mooring devices for lighter-than-air 

aircraft designed to enable such aircraft to be moored in the open 

without wind screens or other protection against the effect of wind.”

      “The invention comprises, broadly, a mast which is of sufficient 

height to permit the airship being moored thereto, either just resting 

on or clear of the ground, and which is bifurcated at its upper end 

for the attachment of mooring ropes thereto at widely separated points, 

these ropes being also attached to the envelop at two points separated

laterally from each other which do not come into contact with any 

part of the mooring mast. Means carried by the mast are provided for 

taking up the slack of the ropes in the operation of mooring the ship.”

NOTE: Masterman’s patent applies only to the mast. He explains that 

a rigid or semi-rigid airship might be modified to be able to use the mast, 

and that mooring ropes near the nose of a non-rigid airship envelope 

would be attached by “Parseval rings”. There is no reference or record 

of any patent claiming to modify an airship to enable it to be moored 

to a crutch mast, or to use such mooring ropes for temporary mooring 

without a mast. 

Todays patent is the second of Slater’s patents associated with

light-weight balloon envelope materials and fabrication processes.

“When heavy pay-loads are being considered, it has been the 

practice in the past to add load bearing tapes, lines or members 

to the balloon envelope structure in order to enhance its load 

carrying capabilities. Unfortunately, as the reinforcement material 

is added, the overall weight of the vehicle per se is increased, 

this detracting from the load carrying capacity.

      Recently, the availability of a light weight scrim prepared from 

woven polyester fibers of polyethylene terephthalate, such as 

Dacron, has made it possible to develop heavy load balloons of 

exceptionally light weight. The envelope material is preferably of 

high strength, such as for example stress oriented film prepared 

from polyethylene terephthalate, available under the trade name 

of Mylar. Prior to the advent of the scrim materials for balloon 

vehicles, load tapes attached to the balloon wall were generally

provided for assisting in supporting the load. One major drawback 

of load tapes is that they fail to distribute the load evenly when the 

balloon is not fully deployed. The scrim reinforced balloon provides 

uniform strength throughout the balloon and the load supporting 

strength is not concentrated on the few load tapes which may be 

maintained under tension. Scrim reinforced materials are also 

advantageous in that they provide tear stopping capabilities which 

eliminate catastrophic ruptures or failures.The material is flexible at 

extremely low temperatures encountered at stratospheric atmospheres.”

William Stout,  the aviation pioneer who designed america’s first 

all-metal aircraft, is rightly famous for Stout’s Laws: 

“SIMPLICATE” and “ADD MORE LIGHTNESS”.

This patent is a classic example of both.

NOTE: Slater describes SCRIM as long threads of a high-strength

material. He discusses its mechanical (weight and strength) 

characteristics, generally ignoring thermal, optical, chemical, and 

electrical properties. 

His innovation, disclosed nearly a decade after Goodyear designed 

the last Navy airship, improved tear resistance, simplified envelope 

design, and reduced envelope weight, without requiring precision 

alignment of the “scrim” fibers.

The USPTO cited only 244/31 (Balloon); four of the patents 

which reference it, also cite 244/126 (Airship skin construction) 

or 244/128 (Airship gas cell construction and arrangement):

4,113,206  Lighter-than-air apparatus and method of utilizing same,

4,267,989  Toy hot air balloon,

4,387,868  Method and apparatus for launching and inflating a 

                  space balloon,

4,390,149  Balloon envelope and method of fabricating same,

4,434,958  Method of construction for a container with a symmetrical 

                  lobed structure and container constructed according to 

                  the said process,

4,877,205 High-altitude balloon and method and apparatus,

6,892,513 Method of forming and filling an end load carton with 

                 a food delivery system.

Today, nano-technology researchers are experimenting with lighter, 

stronger, thinner threads with amazing properties. 

Todays patent is one of Wallis' thirty-six U.S. patents.

It is one of ten dedicated to Lighter-than-air.

      “It has been found that, if a single cable is employed to 

draw the nose of the airship towards the mast, the airship, 

as soon as it approaches to within a certain distance of the 

mast, tends to kite or set up lateral hunting or over-rising 

forward movements, and, in order to prevent such dangerous 

movements of the ship it has been proposed to provide, 

in addition to the main anchoring or hauling down cable, 

a pair of side guy ropes or cables, each of which is attached 

at one of its ends to the nose of the airship, the other ends of 

the guy ropes being attached to anchor points situated to 

leeward of the mast and respectively to port and starboard of 

the airship, said anchor points being either provided on the 

ground or being situated on laterally projecting members on 

the mooring mast.

      According to one feature of the present invention, and, 

in lieu of the customary single main hauling cable and the 

usual side guys, we provide a bridle composed of a pair of 

ropes or cables which extend from opposite sides of the nose 

of the airship and which are brought together, or close to one 

another, at their other ends, such ropes or cables being adapted 

to be simultaneously wound in so as to haul down the airship 

until it reaches, or is brought into close proximity to the mooring 

mast or other anchoring point. It has been found that, if an 

airship is hauled down by a bridle composed as aforesaid, of a 

pair of ropes or cables, the use of side guy ropes or cables can 

be dispensed with and the airship may be brought within any 

desired distance of the mooring mast or other anchoring point 

without danger of over-riding, sailing or fouling the same. If, 

during the hauling in of the airship, its engines are run astern 

the stability of the vessel while being brought to the mast is 

increased.”

NOTE: Two of the assigned classifications are in the SHIP Class. 

Although the text indicates that the mast might be installed on a 

ship, or a monitor, none of the approved claims mention either a 

maritime or mobile mast. (The airship would have to be designed

such that the hauling-in cables, and their near the bow attachments,

were capable of handling all the forces involved with bringing the

airship to the mast in high and gusty winds.)

Todays patent is the second of Schnitzer’s three airship mooring 

patents, all were assigned to Luftschiffbau Zeppelin.

      “According to my invention the airship is not moored to a 

fixed point but to a machine capable of moving or being moved 

about. This machine has of course to be kept down by its own 

weight or by some other suitable means so that a safe mooring 

is warranted. I prefer to select a point at the bow of the ship for 

being moored to the machine, so that the rear part of the ship 

may swing around in accordance with the direction of the wind. 

But it will be advantageous to provide for the attachment in the 

rear of some wheels when on the ground, or of a float when on 

water. By this a smooth swinging of the rear part of the ship will be

attained. It may be advisable to make this attachment in the rear so 

heavy that under normal conditions the stern of the ship will not 

be lifted by the wind from the ground or from the water while the 

ship is moored down.

      If, in accordance with my invention, the airship is moored to a 

float or ship on water there does not exist any difficulty for the 

floating mooring machine to turn round with the airship when the 

latter is swung into a different direction by the wind, as the water 

will easily allow such movement. This is different with a vehicle on 

the ground. Here it will be best to provide for a ball-and-socket joint 

in the connecting means between airship and mooring machine, or 

the latter may be moved on to a turntable while the rear wheel or 

wheels may revolve on special concentric tracks. In the centre of 

such turntable connections may be provided for replenishing the 

airship with lifting gas, gasoline and water.”

Note: All three approved claims specify a resilient mooring point 

underneath the bow of an airship, not at the bow.  Despite the discussion 

in the text, none mention a bumper, float, wheel, etc., near the stern. 

Nor do any of the approved claims involve replenishment or servicing connections.

Schnitzer’s patent is the second of eleven cited in Lockheed’s 

P/N 7,464,650 Ground handling system for an airship.