 |
AirTalk.org
Aviation discussions newsgroups
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Rob Arndt
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pat Flannery
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:21 am Post subject: Re: X-15 EMW A-6 Connection |
 |
|
Rob Arndt wrote:
The scramjet dummy used on the X-15 was an entirely different design
than that on the German design, which wouldn't even work at much over
the speed of sound due to its lack of a center-body shock-cone to reduce
the velocity of the incoming air to where combustion could be sustained.
In comparison, the X-15 design was to work only at multiple Mach velocity.
You missed the obvious connection though; before the X-15, North
American Aviation built but did not launch three combination
rocket-ramjet vehicles called NA-704 or XSSM-A-2 based directly on the
ramjet boosted A4b/A9, which became the basis of the Navaho missile;
they moved the wing to the back, and made it into a canard design, but
even they admitted it was based on German design experience:
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app1/sm-64.html
Note that the ramjets now have shock-cones in them.
BTW the "A6" in that above drawing cited isn't the real A6.
So what's an "A6"? An A6 is a design for a subscale A4 using storable
propellants.
The only manned V2 derivative is the manned A4b/A9, with or without ramjet.
Somehow, somebody got it confused with the A6 years ago, and the thing
has been hanging around ever since under the wrong designation.
Pat |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob Arndt
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 14, 2007 4:51 am Post subject: Re: X-15 EMW A-6 Connection |
|
|
On Apr 13, 4:21�pm, Pat Flannery <flan...@daktel.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Rob Arndt wrote:
EMW A-4 with ramjet:http://www.project1947.com/gfb/a4b-manned2.gif
EMW A-6 with ramjet:http://xplanes.free.fr/a6/images/a6.jpg
X-15 with ramjet:http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/images/content/110467main_X-15_3_3...
*X-15 ramjet is dummy used for tests, but same configuration as
previous EMW designs.
Mere coincidence or the fact that NACA/NASA had access to German EMW
documents???
The scramjet dummy used on the X-15 was an entirely different design
than that on the German design, which wouldn't even work at much over
the speed of sound due to its lack of a center-body shock-cone to reduce
the velocity of the incoming air to where combustion could be sustained.
In comparison, the X-15 design was to work only at multiple Mach velocity.
You missed the obvious connection though; before the X-15, North
American Aviation built but did not launch three combination
rocket-ramjet vehicles called NA-704 or XSSM-A-2 based directly on the
ramjet boosted A4b/A9, which became the basis of the Navaho missile;
they moved the wing to the back, and made it into a canard design, but
even they admitted it was based on German design experience:http://www..designation-systems.net/dusrm/app1/sm-64.html
Note that the ramjets now have shock-cones in them.
BTW the "A6" in that above drawing cited isn't the real A6.
So what's an "A6"? An A6 is a design for a subscale A4 using storable
propellants.
The only manned V2 derivative is the manned A4b/A9, with or without ramjet.
Somehow, somebody got it confused with the A6 years ago, and the thing
has been hanging around ever since under the wrong designation.
Pat
|
That's incorrect. The first EMW A-4b design had an A-9 engine. The EMW
A-6 was both a rocket design and a manned rocket with a totally
different EMW engine plus a ramjet. The EMW A-9/I and A-9/II designs
were associated with manned A-9 rockets boosted by the A-10 rocket and
the last design was streamlined. There is no confusion on this side...
Rob  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rob Arndt
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 16, 2007 6:11 am Post subject: Re: X-15 EMW A-6 Connection |
|
|
On Apr 15, 6:34?pm, Pat Flannery <flan...@daktel.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Rob Arndt wrote:
Hey Dan,
it's my book cover he is disrespecting and he also made fun of
deceased Hermann Noordung, a virtually unknown pioneer of modern
rocketry by mocking his circular space station design (which was
proposed in the 1920s)...comparing it to a car tire.
It looks like a car tire, right down to the spokes, just like the WvB
station looks like a donut.
BTW, the Noordung station's "Wohnrad" name translates as "Living Wheel",
so he himself saw the resemblance.
Pat
|
Wohnrad in German literally means LIFE WHEEL. In Noordung's book that
YOU don't have and I do, he calls it a HABITAT RING as well. So f**k-
off idiot.
Shows your lack of:
a) reputable resources
b) understanding of Noordung's terminology
c) and plain old lack of common sense. For 1929, Noordung's Wohnrad
was in all the scientific news reports in the world that mattered.
Even today, we are still building LEO lego-style modular pieces of
shit serviced by an outdated accident-prone shuttle system. Any low-IQ
person with some vision would KNOW that laser pulsing a lightship
cargo carrier would be infinately better than the Ba-349 Natter/Me-163
style US VTO space launch and glide-back.
Also:
As Vril Chefin Maria Orsic pointed-out back in the 1920s- future
spaceflight (Raumflug) with rockets was a dead-end. Only now in the
21st century do we see how inefficient and accident prone they are and
how we will never leave even our own solar system with rocketry. More
importantly, SHE was right way back in 1922, long before NASA figured
this out.
Rob |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 3:51 am Post subject: Re: X-15 EMW A-6 Connection |
|
|
On Apr 11, 10:54 pm, "Rob Arndt" <teuton...@aol.com> wrote:
| Quote: | EMW A-4 with ramjet:http://www.project1947.com/gfb/a4b-manned2.gif
EMW A-6 with ramjet:http://xplanes.free.fr/a6/images/a6.jpg
X-15 with ramjet:http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/images/content/110467main_X-15_3_3...
*X-15 ramjet is dummy used for tests, but same configuration as
previous EMW designs.
Mere coincidence or the fact that NACA/NASA had access to German EMW
documents???
Rob
|
Jus cause they look the same doesn't mean they are the same. Checkout
the masses and specific impulses of each...
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/v2.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-2_rocket
The A-4 (or V2) massed 20 metric tons at lift-off and had a structural
fraction of 26% and a specific impulse of 215 seconds.burning LOX/
Alchohol - implies a 2.81 km/sec terminal velocity - ideally. It was
launched vertically ascending under rocket power.
A V2 equipped with wings and a ramjet, and replacing the 1 ton of high-
explosives with a manned capsule, would have been doable I suppose.
It bears passing resemblance to the X-15.
http://astronautix.com/project/x15.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-15
The X-15 has a mass of 16 tons fully loaded and structural fraction of
43% and the XLR engine produced 28.5 tons of thrust at 279 sec Isp and
burned ammonia and LOX. It was highly throttable the V2 was not. The
A-4 used 18 thrust chambers and was very complex as a result.
The XLR99 was a much larger thrust chamber and highly throttable and
more advanced in many ways.
The engines are entirely different,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:V2_engine.jpg
http://www.astronautix.com/engines/xlr99.htm
The airframes are entirely different.
The launch systems are entirely different.
The materials they're made of are entirely different.
They are different sizes. And different masses. Different structural
fractions. And different mission profiles.
They're not the same vehicle and have little to do with one another. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dan
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 6:11 am Post subject: Re: X-15 EMW A-6 Connection |
|
|
Willie.Mookie (AT) gmail (DOT) com wrote:
| Quote: | On May 11, 9:36 am, Dan <B...@aol.com> wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote:
Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
I read somewhere that the NAZIs spent the equivalent of $20 billion
1980 dollars on V2 development during WWII.
They spent a absolute fortune on it, and didn't get anywhere their
money's worth for their investment.
As a weapon, the thing sucked.
I did the math on this once:http://tinyurl.com/3ch9or
"Out of curiosity, I looked up the facts and figures on casualties
caused by
V-2's (or A-4's, for the purists) during W.W.II:
A total of approximately 3,170 V-2s were launched operationally at targets;
the vast majority at London, England and Antwerp, Belgium.
The V-2 attacks on England killed a total of 2,511 people.
The attacks on Belgium by both V-1's and V-2's killed a total of 6,448
people- assuming a breakdown of the type of weapons used to be the same as
the attacks on England, then around 44% of the deaths would be attributable
to V-2's; or around 2,840 total.
If we include another, say, 200 deaths for other targets that came under
V-2
attack, we come up with a total of around 5,550 total fatalities or a
average
of 1 and 3/4 killed per missile.
...if von Braun was a murdering terrorist, he was a rank amateur by
most standards.
(Figures are from V-Missiles of the Third Reich, by Dieter
Holsken, Monogram Aviation Publications,1994, ISBN 0-914144-42-1) "
We will never know how many concentration camp inmates were murdered
by SS Major von Braun in the production of those missiles. I suspect
many more were killed during construction of manufacturing facilities
alone than were killed on the receiving end of the missiles.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I think you're being a bit harsh against vonBraun. But, it would be
interesting to see how the chain of command worked there at his
factory..
|
<snip>
SS Major von Braun was more aware of what happened to concentration
camp inmates. If he had opposed the slave labour he could have refused
to work for the Nazis. Granted he probably would have been imprisoned
and forced to work anyway. Or he could have been shot, sent to the
Eastern Front, who knows? He could even have suicided. The fact remains
he was complicit. I know he wasn't in Dora's chain of command, but
that's no excuse. Most Germans never saw the direct effects of
concentration camps until after the war. SS Major von Braun did. I hope
he's rotting in Hell.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2007 6:11 am Post subject: Re: X-15 EMW A-6 Connection |
|
|
On May 11, 9:36 am, Dan <B...@aol.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Pat Flannery wrote:
Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:
I read somewhere that the NAZIs spent the equivalent of $20 billion
1980 dollars on V2 development during WWII.
They spent a absolute fortune on it, and didn't get anywhere their
money's worth for their investment.
As a weapon, the thing sucked.
I did the math on this once:http://tinyurl.com/3ch9or
"Out of curiosity, I looked up the facts and figures on casualties
caused by
V-2's (or A-4's, for the purists) during W.W.II:
A total of approximately 3,170 V-2s were launched operationally at targets;
the vast majority at London, England and Antwerp, Belgium.
The V-2 attacks on England killed a total of 2,511 people.
The attacks on Belgium by both V-1's and V-2's killed a total of 6,448
people- assuming a breakdown of the type of weapons used to be the same as
the attacks on England, then around 44% of the deaths would be attributable
to V-2's; or around 2,840 total.
If we include another, say, 200 deaths for other targets that came under
V-2
attack, we come up with a total of around 5,550 total fatalities or a
average
of 1 and 3/4 killed per missile.
...if von Braun was a murdering terrorist, he was a rank amateur by
most standards.
(Figures are from V-Missiles of the Third Reich, by Dieter
Holsken, Monogram Aviation Publications,1994, ISBN 0-914144-42-1) "
We will never know how many concentration camp inmates were murdered
by SS Major von Braun in the production of those missiles. I suspect
many more were killed during construction of manufacturing facilities
alone than were killed on the receiving end of the missiles.
Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
|
I think you're being a bit harsh against vonBraun. But, it would be
interesting to see how the chain of command worked there at his
factory..
ALL major weapons systems got their share of slave labor, it wasn't
vonBraun's idea to use them nor did he request them. But given that
he had to use them, my understanding is that they were used
sparingly..
But actual data would be welcome. My knowledge comes from speaking
with my graduate advisor in propulsion systems - von Eschen, at OSU
when I went to school there, who actually worked on the V1 in
Germany. The missile factory according to him was a plum assignment
as slave labor posts go (if any slave labor assignment can be so
characterized) the death rates were lower than other postings and the
engineering staff were considerate of talent no matter where it
appeared. Besides, von Braun and the other engineers weren't
responsible for day to day management of this labor pool.
While vonBraun is culpable as all Germans were for this atrocity - we
don't want to make light of it- within the context of his chosen role
- I think he and others behaved as honorably as their roles allowed -
despite the total unravelling of things at the very end.
I think the real problem came when the Americans and the Russians were
targeting the site. The SS decided that the skilled and talented
slave labor that built critical components for the V2 were better off
dead - and so, they killed many laborers who had no opportunity to
escape. The fact that vonBraun and his engineering team sought to
escape execution as well at this time pretty much tells the story
there - it wasn't they who were responsible for the atrocities there
by and large - it was the SS.
But vonBraun and others on the technical staff do bear a certain
responsibility for their role - no doubt about it.
http://www.hyperarts.com/pynchon/gravity/extra/slavelabor.html#top
More here;
A History of The Dora Camp: The Untold Story of the Nazi Slave Labor
Camp That Secretly Manufactured V-2 Rockets
Subtitle:
Author: Andre Sellier
Publisher:
ISBN: 9781566635110
Format: Hardcover
Version:
The author, himself a former prisoner at Dora, tells the dramatic
story of the camp, the factory, and the underground work sites. He
includes unpublished testimony from several dozen prisoners and
recounts the horrors of everyday life at Dora and the murderous
evacuation of the camp.
.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
