• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

German EMW A11 Rocket - Paper call

Status
Not open for further replies.

Wasp

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jan 11, 2010
Messages
27
Reaction score
5
I'm searching for any bit of information about the EMW A11 rocket stage project, that was thought up by the advanced developement group of Peenemünde during the late years of the war, but never (at last not that we know of) reached a detailed developement stage.

The A11 stage should have been mated with the A9/A10 to create a three-stage rocket, that would have been estimated to be able putting a payload of 500kg into a low 300km orbit.
Further information are pretty scarce about this project.
The measures available should be:
Height: 25m
Diameter: 8,10m
Span: 15,30m or 16,10m
Mass: 586,000 kg
Thrust: 11,700.00 kn
no. of engines: 6

However all these measures (taken from http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/a9a10a11.htm and repeated through other sources in the web) seem not really confirmed and somewhat doubtful. I.e. the diameter of 8,10m, yet the A 10 with a span of 9m should be totally encased. That's hardly possible with 8,10m, isn't it?

There is an illustriation (see attachement below) that is stated as a drawing from 1946 for the US Army done based on the information Wernher von Braun gave them about the A9/10/11 project.

Another big question is the number and configuration of the engines. It's stated that it should be six A10 engines. However the recent Anigrand release incorporated 8 (don't know where they possibly got that info from). Also the six engined design has the open question of direction control. Should it have been achieved through giant graphit paddles like in the case of the one engined A4 or A10 (seems unpractically to me), or like planned in the early developement stages of the A10 with six engines, through direct control of the thrust of the single rocket engines (reducing thrust on one side would turn the rocket etc.)?

I also attached a drawing of the princilple of a six-engined rocket like the A10.
However I'm wondering if the plan for directional control through the thrust itself, which is basically a sound idea, would still work if all six single thrusts are combined by leading them through a venturi chamber shown?

Any help or opinion is appreciated.
Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • EMW A 11 von Braun 1946.jpg
    EMW A 11 von Braun 1946.jpg
    12.2 KB · Views: 133
  • emw A 10 Sechs-Triebwerksaufbau.jpg
    emw A 10 Sechs-Triebwerksaufbau.jpg
    194.8 KB · Views: 124

FutureSpaceTourist

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
589
Reaction score
14
As I understand it there are very few confirmed facts and figures for the A-11 (or indeed the A-12).

Volume 5 number 6 of Aerospace Projects Review has some information (see http://www.up-ship.com/eAPR/pv5n6.htm) but perhaps not the level of detail you're seeking. Not sure that detail exists anywhere? No idea where the Astronautix data comes from, suggest you contact Mark Wade and ask him.
 

edwest2

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,394
Reaction score
581
There is a British document titled CIOS Report XXX-II-125, German Guided Missile Research. Significant comments include the following:

"The V-series of missiles, four known types, two being used by the end of the war in Europe..."

Then there is the document titled An Evaluation of German Capabilities in 1945, which states: "Larger rockets (68 feet in length as against 45 feet) are known to exist, and may appear in small quantities during the year."





Ed
 

FutureSpaceTourist

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
589
Reaction score
14
edwest said:
"Larger rockets (68 feet in length as against 45 feet) are known to exist, and may appear in small quantities during the year."

68 feet is about the size of the A10 stage on its own, I don't think this is a reference to the A11.

Wasp said:
The measures available should be:
Height: 25m
Diameter: 8,10m
Span: 15,30m or 16,10m
Mass: 586,000 kg
Thrust: 11,700.00 kn
no. of engines: 6

However all these measures (taken from http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/a9a10a11.htm and repeated through other sources in the web) seem not really confirmed and somewhat doubtful. I.e. the diameter of 8,10m, yet the A 10 with a span of 9m should be totally encased. That's hardly possible with 8,10m, isn't it?

Having read a bit more carefully I now see that Mark has just scaled the A11 stage from the 1946 drawing using the A9/A10 figures. Yes the A10 with fins was 9m but without the fins was less than 5m. I wonder at what altitude first stage separation would have occurred and hence whether fins on the A10 second stage would actually have been necessary/useful?!
 

Michel Van

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,970
Reaction score
1,328
on A11 rocket
the problem: when Von Braun design this ?
allot members of Von Braun Team deny that was design during the WW2
the book "Werner von Braun" by Erik Bergaust
Von Braun did not dear to go beyond the A-10 except in imagination, although there was always in his mind,
yet another still larger booster logically to be designsted the A-11.
Note
Von Braun was arrested by SS on March 14 1944, because „Wehrkraftzersetzung“ and Treason
because he had talk in public to build bigger rockets for Space exploration and not for War use


Scott Lowther presumes that Von Braun design the A11 during 1945/1946 at Fort Bliss, White Sands. USA
the only painting of A11 is made by De Beek 1946 at White Sands

data about the A11 is vague
only that the Thrust is 1600 tons (8x 200 tons engine of A10?)
the use A10/A9 as upper stage
and that it third stage (A9 or A4b) goes into Orbit
Von Braun mentioned that a manned A-9 could be put in orbit
Source:
Aerospace Projects Review pV5N6 September-October 2003
by Scott Lowther
page 27
 

edwest2

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,394
Reaction score
581
I am puzzled by the reply. I am aware of the possible height of the A-11. From the same CIOS document, the first Appendix states: "Only the A-15 was never constructed." This after making previous reference to the "A-11, A-12, A-13, A-14 further development models of the A9/10 with 3500 miles range."
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,130
Reaction score
1,676
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
edwest said:
I am puzzled by the reply. I am aware of the possible height of the A-11. From the same CIOS document, the first Appendix states: "Only the A-15 was never constructed." This after making previous reference to the "A-11, A-12, A-13, A-14 further development models of the A9/10 with 3500 miles range."

There was a *lot* of confusion at the time. None of those were ever designed in any detail, never mind built.
 

edwest2

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,394
Reaction score
581
A lot of confusion? I see. I have the list of names of the people who compiled the CIOS report I referenced. Were they all confused or individually confused? The American report which stated that larger rockets are known to exist was... what? I also have a U.S. Navy report that makes reference to V-3 and V-4. Oh wait. I get it. Nothing to see here. Move along.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,130
Reaction score
1,676
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
edwest said:
A lot of confusion? I see. I have the list of names of the people who compiled the CIOS report I referenced. Were they all confused or individually confused?

Those responsible for writing that unsupported single line were probably basing that on minimal data provided by shaky sources.

The American report which stated that larger rockets are known to exist was... what?

Wrong.

It happens. See: "Iraq has active nuclear weapons program." Ooops.

I also have a U.S. Navy report that makes reference to V-3 and V-4.

Yeah, and? A worthless multistage rocket of minimal payload and wretched accuracy, and a giant underground cannon that got bombed into oblivion when the Brits figured out what it was. Whoop-de-shit.
 

edwest2

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,394
Reaction score
581
You sir, are an irritant and a jerk.

The CIOS Report was compiled by the G-2 Division, SHAEF (Rear) APO 413 and consists of pages, not single lines.

I should release a book titled The Other V-Weapons - The Rockets That Didn't Exist But Did


As far as posting further on this topic, I will cease and desist noting that the documents which exist from three different sources were obviously written by confused people. Or perhaps not.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
8,130
Reaction score
1,676
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
edwest said:
You sir, are an irritant and a jerk.

Shrug. Accepted. Still, it's better than being a credulous buffoon.


As far as posting further on this topic, I will cease and desist ...

Mmmm-hmmm...

noting that the documents which exist from three different sources were obviously written by confused people. Or perhaps not.

Have government reports *ever* been wrong, do you think?
 

martinbayer

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
721
Reaction score
197
edwest,

don't let Mr. Lowther aka Orionblamblam get to you. It helps to read the last sentence of this entry at his blog to understand how he sees himself: http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=7413

Martin
 

edwest2

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Nov 9, 2007
Messages
1,394
Reaction score
581
Martin,


Thank you for the reference. I am automatically allergic to people who describe themselves as pleasantly dysfunctional.



Regards,
Ed
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,295
Reaction score
1,255
Ok, the last 7 posts didn't bring any substantial information about the original
theme and the thread starts to slip into insults and defamation. :mad:

Topic locked
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Top