A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Science Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Von Braun rockets on Encyclopedia Astronautica



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old November 11th 03, 04:09 AM
Scott Lowther
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Von Braun rockets on Encyclopedia Astronautica

Pat Flannery wrote:

Scott Lowther wrote:

Actaully, no. This one is for real. While Mercado/Miranda have drawn
them up... the three-views shown at the top fo this page are the real
deal.




WHAT! A secret German aircraft project I didn't know about? (much less
have a model of?) I thought I knew about them all...if some German
designer got a few too many beers in him, and scribbled out something
with forward swept wings, rockets, and ramjets on a paper napkin in the
bar, I thought it would have been in one of my books;


Do you have "Die Deutsche Luftrustung, 1933-1945," Volumes 1 through 4,
by Nowarra? Nowarra's a reliable source. His drawings tend to suck, as
they're generally second-gen 1960's photocopies from microfilm, but
they're the real deal. The Fi-166 is in Volume II, pages 32-33. I don't
have a copy of the work, but I've a folder with a bunch of photocopies
from it.

Here is an interesting thought- Why didn't the
Germans ever stick an A5 on the nose of an A4- the way we did with the
WAC Corporal in Project Bumper?


Because the A-5 was reusable, and launching it atop an A-4 would have
made it impossible to recover. And the idea of launching a rocket like
that and not recoviring it... why, that's just down-right non-Teutonic.

--
Scott Lowther, Engineer
Remove the obvious (capitalized) anti-spam
gibberish from the reply-to e-mail address

  #42  
Old November 11th 03, 09:10 AM
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Von Braun rockets on Encyclopedia Astronautica

Scott Lowther wrote:

Because the A-5 was reusable, and launching it atop an A-4 would have
made it impossible to recover. And the idea of launching a rocket like
that and not recoviring it... why, that's just down-right non-Teutonic.



It would have had an advantage over our WAC Corporal though- exhaust
vanes and a gyro-stabilization platform to keep it nose upwards- we had
to spin stabilize the WAC with some small strap-on engines ala Honest
John; and my intention was that the thing _be_ recoverable, the whole
mission being a small scale version of the A9/A10 flight plan, with the
winged A7 ending up parachuting into the sea after it's return glide.
Ignition at altitude was probably the major stumbling block; but if you
used the Walter hydrogen peroxide motor on it (such as was used for
later A5 flights), you would at least be able to eliminate the fireworks
pinwheel up the combustion chamber.

Pat

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.