Advanced versions of the V-2 rocket

On Jul 23, 12:15?pm, Scott Lowther
wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:
On Jul 23, 9:58?am, Scott Lowther
wrote:

Rob Arndt wrote:

Hey Pat, tell Scott to provide drawings of the 1945 Mecklenburg
Atomischeflugzeug design and I'll be impressed.

I'm perfectly capable of *inventing* such drawings. But it's unclear
what value there woudl be in such an excercise, given that it is quite
unlikely that any such drawings were actually made in 1945 in the first
place. If I'm wrong... hey. Great. prove it... post them.

Bull**** Scott. I challenged you to provide ONE illustration or photo
off a very small list of rare aircraft and you could do nothing with
all your aerospace knowledge.

I'm still waiting for you to post those drawings.

--
-------
The fact that I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake. - H.L. Mencken- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The entire point of my challenge was that the majority of those a/c I
listed so far do not have any illustrations or photos released,
restored, discovered, etc... even when completely validated.

With your APR material I challenged you to provide any of those a/c
listed... if you could- even with an illustration. You can't. The
difference between me and you is I am far more familiar with rare a/c
than you are and wanted to honestly see if you had anything on these a/
c. It's obvious you don't.

In 9 years at RAM I have posted thousands of a/c and many are ultra-
rare. When I start work on my Rare Aircraft book Volume 1 over 400
rare WW2 types will be featured. This will put APR to share and it
will be available online as a reference for everyone. As more rare
types become available, the pages will be updated. I am covering every
nation involved.

So to me APR is your rag.

Rob

On Jul 22, 8:05?pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:
By the end of the war, Rheinmetall-Borsig had also proposed a VTOL a/
c!
http://discaircraft.greyfalcon.us/RHEINMETALL.htm

Interestingly, this design doesn't show up on Luft 46:http://www.luft46.com/
Because it's fabricated out of whole cloth.
Because of the position of the engine under the body, its center of thrust doesn't pass through the center of mass of the fuselage and wings, particularly given the huge vertical fin.
So on takeoff it's going to flip on its back as soon as it rises from the ground.
The non-retracting gear is also odd, as is the lack of any wingtip skids for horizontal landing. In fact it is going to have to be dragged off the runway like a Me-163 after landing, which proved to be disastrous in practice due to allied strafing on airfields, which is why the Me-163D/Ju-248 ended up with conventional landing gear.
The big question though is: "If you have a runway to land on after the mission, why aren't you taking off from it also?"
Note it lands on wheeels, not on the skids the Germans were using on the aircraft they designed to land on grass like the Me-163 or early Ar-234.
People into the structural end of things might want to consider how the landing gear is supposed to be attached to the bottom of the engine pod in a robust manner and the pilot's lack of visibility. One can also speculate on the airflow over the nose ventral fin, and what it's going to do when it goes into the jet intake. This is where things like compressor stalls and flame-outs come from.
Other than Rob's website, does this thing show up anywhere else on the web?
Why, yes it does!
It shows up where Rob stole his pictures and text from:http://fantastic-plastic.com/Rheinme...BorsigVTOL.htm

Pat

Gee Pat,

It took me 5 minutes to completely rewrite that entry and post new
photos, making it 100% mine now.

All remaining provisional pages will be similarly "assimilated" into
the collective

"Your complaints are futile"- Trek boy

Rob

Scott Lowther wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:


Hey Pat, tell Scott to provide drawings of the 1945 Mecklenburg
Atomischeflugzeug design and I'll be impressed.



I'm perfectly capable of *inventing* such drawings. But it's unclear
what value there woudl be in such an excercise, given that it is quite
unlikely that any such drawings were actually made in 1945 in the
first place. If I'm wrong... hey. Great. prove it... post them.

He can't... they aren't on someone's website he can "borrow" them from. :-)
I say it should be a asymmetrical forward-swept flying wing made of
plywood and sheet iron, driven by a nuclear pulse jet fueled by red
mercury, and crewed by pony-tailed Hitler youth girls cloned by the
thousands from a single egg, so that they can be easily replaced when
the radiation makes them croak.
It must take off from a ramp with the aid of 100 Walter RATO motors,
land on a skid, and be armed with a modified recoilless 800 mm "Dora"
cannon powered by coal dust and LOX, firing shells full of botulism
bacteria to pollute the Jewish-owned delicatessens and grocery stores of
New York City. This shall bring America to its knees, as there shall be
no source of Kosher food left for its Zionist overlords to eat, and they
shall all soon starve to death. Every time the cannon fires, a
counter-balancing slug of propaganda leaflets shall be ejected rearwards
from the aircraft, falling over the poor areas of New York City and
attempting to start a revolt among the underclasses, with catchy sayings
like: "Adolf Hitler = Free Beer For All!", "If You Think Big Band Music
Is Hot, Wait Till You "Jazz" To Big Bund Music!", and "Hello Negro;
Shouldn't It Be the Jews Who Ride In The Back Of The Bus?" ;-)

Pat

On Jul 23, 2:21?pm, Pat Flannery wrote:
Scott Lowther wrote:
Rob Arndt wrote:

Hey Pat, tell Scott to provide drawings of the 1945 Mecklenburg
Atomischeflugzeug design and I'll be impressed.

I'm perfectly capable of *inventing* such drawings. But it's unclear
what value there woudl be in such an excercise, given that it is quite
unlikely that any such drawings were actually made in 1945 in the
first place. If I'm wrong... hey. Great. prove it... post them.

He can't... they aren't on someone's website he can "borrow" them from. :-)
I say it should be a asymmetrical forward-swept flying wing made of
plywood and sheet iron, driven by a nuclear pulse jet fueled by red
mercury, and crewed by pony-tailed Hitler youth girls cloned by the
thousands from a single egg, so that they can be easily replaced when
the radiation makes them croak.
It must take off from a ramp with the aid of 100 Walter RATO motors,
land on a skid, and be armed with a modified recoilless 800 mm "Dora"
cannon powered by coal dust and LOX, firing shells full of botulism
bacteria to pollute the Jewish-owned delicatessens and grocery stores of
New York City. This shall bring America to its knees, as there shall be
no source of Kosher food left for its Zionist overlords to eat, and they
shall all soon starve to death. Every time the cannon fires, a
counter-balancing slug of propaganda leaflets shall be ejected rearwards
from the aircraft, falling over the poor areas of New York City and
attempting to start a revolt among the underclasses, with catchy sayings
like: "Adolf Hitler = Free Beer For All!", "If You Think Big Band Music
Is Hot, Wait Till You "Jazz" To Big Bund Music!", and "Hello Negro;
Shouldn't It Be the Jews Who Ride In The Back Of The Bus?" ;-)

Pat

The only thing you got right about the Mecklenburg Atomic Aircraft,
which was a theoretical design study (just as the Kriegsmarine had
studied proposal for a reactor U-boat and similar military studies by
the German Army concerning reactor energy) was the powerplant- a form
of radioactive thermal jet. It was not a flying wing, but a long
fuselage bomber-type with a shoulder mounted highly swept wing and
central engine core running aft. The tailfins were canted and it had
heavy landing gear with multiple wheels.

I have part of the description, but no illustration. I would not be
surprised if it became one of the Convair, Lockheed, or Northrop
designs- but that remains to be proven.

Rob

John Carrier wrote:
Well, a rocket scientist among us? Then you must have intimate knowledge of
the development of large solid fuel rockets. There was more than passing
difficulty in casting the propellant to make a reliable motor in their early
history. If it's so easy to scale upwards then perhaps our 5" aircraft
rockets of WW2 could have been the basis for our first IR and ICBMs.
Certainly Atlas, Thor, Jupiter and Titan would have been solid fuel designs
(lighter, simpler, etc). They weren't.


They did design a solid-fueled Jupiter for the Navy - it was the
predecessor of Polaris.
Of course there is the original BIS Moonship approach... hundreds and
hundreds of small solid motors. :-D

Pat

John Carrier wrote:
We had several similar motors in the 5" and 10" aircraft rockets. A big
difference in the difficulty in creating a motor that would develop
sufficient impulse for a 200, 1200 or 6000 mile range ballistic weapon.


Two of the big German ones were the Rheintochter's booster that
generated 165,344 lb (75,000 kg) thrust for 0.6 seconds, and the
Rheinbote's, which generated 83,774 lb (38,000 kg) for 1.0 second.
The largest wartime U.S one I know of is the one used on the Tiny Tim
rocket which generated 20,000 lb...or 30,000 lb, or 50,000 lb of
thrust... for one second (all three figures are on the Internet).

Pat

Rob Arndt wrote:


The entire point of my challenge was that the majority of those a/c I
listed so far do not have any illustrations or photos released,
restored, discovered, etc... even when completely validated.



That's largely due to many of the "projects" you listed being little
more than wartime "notions" or post-war inventions. Hard to produce
legitimate drawings that don't exist.

With your APR material I challenged you to provide any of those a/c
listed... if you could- even with an illustration. You can't. The
difference between me and you is I am far more familiar with rare a/c
than you are and wanted to honestly see if you had anything on these a/
c. It's obvious you don't.

In 9 years at RAM I have posted thousands of a/c and many are ultra-
rare.

Seems to me that most of what you do is troll aroudn the Web and pick up
stuff that other people have psoted. Thus making them *not* "ultra rare,
since somebopdy by definition got to them before you did.



So to me APR is your rag.



Feel free to not subscribe. But somehow I get the feeling that the stuff
I post online.... why, some of that *just* *might* end up as part of
your "research."


--
-------
The fact that I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake. - H.L. Mencken

Pat Flannery wrote:

The largest wartime U.S one I know of is the one used on the Tiny Tim
rocket which generated 20,000 lb...or 30,000 lb, or 50,000 lb of
thrust... for one second (all three figures are on the Internet).


Which of course means they're *all* true....


--
-------
The fact that I have no remedy for all the sorrows of the world is no reason for my accepting yours. It simply supports the strong probability that yours is a fake. - H.L. Mencken

On Jul 24, 3:57 am, Rob Arndt wrote:
On Jul 23, 10:39?am, Markus Baur wrote:



Dan wrote:
Markus Baur wrote:
Nazi Germany would probably folded economically well before 1945 had
the Swiss decided not to profit from the war. Individuals around the
world profited from the war, but Switzerland is the only nation that did.

i think you missunderstand the situation the swiss found themeslves in ..

being surrounded by the axis, without any significant resources - they
had to buy the coal and oil they needed for heating and essential
transport from germany (at rather high prices and having to pay a
premium to the deutsche rechsbahn for transport) .. no iron, no
aluminium, no other strategic materials

switzerland was VERY hard pressed to come up with enough food to feed
themselves .. there were periods were they were forced to buy basic
staples from the axis

the axis could have taken switzerland - but it would have been
expensive in military term. but what really saved switzerland was the
price in political and epsecialy econmic terms that the axis was
unwilling to pay (and the swiss made it rather clear that they would
leave only scorched earth) ..

the swiss had only a very small number of weapons available to them -
and they choose to use them all in order to defend their country

servus

markus

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There was no need to defend Switzerland from Nazi Germany- there was
no intention of invading them. They were partners and the Swiss even
bought some weapons from Germany. Germany used some Swiss weapons as
well like the Solothurn 20mm S18-1000 AT rifles.


I seem to recall a time at which an Me 110 with Lichtenstein Radar
strayed into
Swiss airspace and its crew was disoriented by search lights and Swiss
FLAK.

The Swiss wouldn't hand the weapon with its extremely sensitive radar
back as is appropriate for a weapon from a combatent either allied or
axis. Goering was getting ready to bomb the airfield as well as send
in hundreds of paratroops. The swiss rather carefully examined the
unit.

In the end the Swiss did return the Me 110, probably having sensed to
what extent the Germans were prepared to do but only after extracting
a promise that 12 Me 109G would be supplied for this sensitive
violation of neutrality.

Swiss FLAK went up to great German night fighters and Allied bombers
alike when they violated swiss neutrality.

That's certainly no act of "partnership". The Me 109 had burned out
engines and after the war Daimler-Benz was made to pay the difference.

Oerlikon guns were supplied to both sides and licensed to both sides.



But Switzerland was always on Germany's side covertly. Sweden was more
or less intimidated into helping Germany due to its iron ore. Spain,
as a fascist ally, supported Hitler but could not afford another war
right after the civil war. Germany had wanted bases there, port
useage, and a staging area to attack Portugal. Franco only allowed
them port access for covert U-boats.

Rob

I think the Swiss did what they had to and what they could. After the
war when there was nothing in Germany the Swiss were big hearted
enough to organize visits by Santa Clause with food parcels when no
one else cared. Switzerland avoided degeneration and did what it
could within physical and political limits for allied airmen, asylum
seekers. Rather decent people.

When you look at the British governments behavior and its propensity
to lie while maintaining a haughty and moral tone my admiration for
the Swiss rises. The British government made up atrocity stories in
the first world war and claimed German soldiers were skewering Belgium
babies on bayonets, turning dead soldiers into soap and raping all the
women, they used Gas against the Kurds, they instilled the Shah's
government (a cause of much of todays problems) and recently a
"Dossier" was used to justify actions in Iraq. Whatever you feel
about these actions is one thing but the act of dishonesty to distort
world and British public perception is another matter.
The Swiss never did that. The US at one point had a policy of
'isolationism' which was approaching neutrality and might have made
the world a better place if they had of applied it since 1917 and let
the foolish Europeans club each other to exhaustion.

If anyone is immoral and responsible for the worlds woes it is not the
Swiss.

On Jul 24, 6:47 am, Pat Flannery wrote:
Ken S. Tucker wrote:

My post acknowledges Mr. Carrier's and Flannery's
and Dan's post as well.
My background is designing and building
rocket engines, solid and liquid, IMHO, if you can build
an A-4 (V2) you can build an SRB. The easy part of
SRB's is they scale up quickly,
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/m...ast/index.html


The Germans didn't have that technology; there solid rocket nozzles were
made of steel.


I have never heard of a guided Rheinbote project;

I'm looking for my references. The system or idea had to be abandoned
or stalled due to resource issues.

the design wouldn't
allow it as you'd have to steer the fins on all the stages as it ascended.



Surely it would be necessary only to steer the final stage. The
Rheinbot reached Mach 5 and was fired from a gun carriage at the
correct angle. Rhurstahl produced the Fritz-X as well as those
planed for X-4, X-7, X-10 missiles. All of them designed by Dr Max
Kramer.

I also note that the exhaust would tend to block radio signals;
inexperience in this area stalled at least some guided US missile
programs.

Typically, for the X-4,X7 and X-10 the missiles was spun along its
axis at about 60 rpm for stability and to even out aerodynamic
imperfections thus allowing lower tollerence manufacture. A single
gyroscope was spun up by a gram of gunpowder a second before launch
and this provided an up reference via a commutator to ensure the
correct control fin was opperated.

The radio guidance beam used by the V2 in some launches was able to
guide aircraft to within 20m at 200km range so something like it could
have been used for Rheinbote. However while it constrained the
position of the aircraft or missile it did not constrain the velocity
as well so that even if the missile was in the middle of the beam it
might be moving 4m/s to the left. Over 5 minutes that could open up
to 1200m. Hence it was thought hybrid inertial and radio systems
provided an answer with the accelerometer guranteeing good lateral
speed control and the radio beam good position control. In the end
all inertial systems evolved to such an extent they proved as good.
Certainly the planed for SG-66 or SG-72 gimballed stable platorms
provided a cross range accelerometer allowing not only speed nulling
of cross winds but potentially stabalising the radio beam system.