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

German rockets pictures

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,024
Reaction score
217
The photo N°6 could be a fanal to all admirers of a manned A-4/V2,
I think. It looks, as there is a hump on the nose, which could be interpreted
as a canopy .. ???
 

Attachments

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,421
Reaction score
283
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Jemiba said:
The photo N°6 could be a fanal to all admirers of a manned A-4/V2,
I think. It looks, as there is a hump on the nose, which could be interpreted
as a canopy .. ???
Unlikely. IF that is a canopy, rather than a blemish or some other mark, then the cockpit would intrude into the alcohol tank.
 
G

gery

Guest
Hi justo...many thank for sharing this "jewels" of reich...
 

Michel Van

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
4,282
Reaction score
113
most fascinating is the stuff on right next big A-4 Model
A Rocket with Ringwing !

there allot Rheinbote variants on right
can be this ring wing also a version of Rheinbote ?
 

Justo Miranda

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
3,524
Reaction score
209
High manoeuvrability device for Wasserfall similar to the "RAZON" american bombs
 

moin1900

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
458
Reaction score
5
Hi everybody

The big thing in the background of the Enzian. What is it ? A flying wing ?
Escanear0003 and Escanear0001

Here the book
German research in world war II: an analysis of the conduct of research
Leslie E. Simon
http://books.google.com/books
Leslie Simon also shows some bombs (?models?) in his book ?
Maybe someone can show us these pictures ?

BTW I am also searching infos about these bombs: BT 1850, KC 1000 ,KC 1800 , AB 1800 Abwurfbehälter and SB 1800. Which was the biggest planned german bomb ? I only know the SC-5000.

Thanks a lot for help.
 

Lauge

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
437
Reaction score
1
moin1900 said:
BTW I am also searching infos about these bombs: BT 1850, KC 1000 ,KC 1800 , AB 1800 Abwurfbehälter and SB 1800. Which was the biggest planned german bomb ? I only know the SC-5000.
If you read German, a good place to start might be "Deutsche Abwurfmunition bis 1945" ("German air-dropped ordnance until 1945") by Wolfgang Fleischer, available from Amazon (http://www.amazon.de/Deutsche-Abwurfmunition-1945-Wolfgang-Fleischer/dp/3613022869/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256842810&sr=1-1). My own copy is still in a moving crate, though, so I can't check if there's info on any of "your" bombs.

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg
 

panzer1946

Rammtiger
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
22
Reaction score
1
this book is translated in English for a few years now and published by Schiffer
 

moin1900

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
458
Reaction score
5
Hi everybody
Thanks for the replies. Justo Lauge panzer1946
Sorry for my very late reply.
German air-dropped weapons to 1945
Deutsche Abwurfmunition bis 1945: Sprengbomben, Brandbomben etc.
by Wolfgang Fleischer
The KC 1000, KC 1800 and SC-500RS were mentioned.
The AB-1800 and SB-1800 were not mentioned ?
Here BT-1850 data
Many greetings
 

thunaer

Was schön ist, fliegt auch.
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Oh my, it’s the Amerika-Rakete in the left corner of image no. 6!

To me it looks like what’s usually referred to as Aggregat 9, i.e. the upper stage of the proposed suborbital ICBM intended to target New York. Note the prominent curved, bladelike fins running along the whole length of the rocket, much unlike any other design today. Of course it could be just a concept for a Wasserfall-sized AA-missile, or an idea for an A4/V2 variant. Yet this photograph clearly proves the image of the A9 prevailing today is based on a real wind tunnel model, and not just made up. The boxart example I‘ve inserted is from a Special Hobby kit. While I cannot spot the A10 (the lower booster stage) among the shapes, this picture is the first palpable historic trace of that design I’ve come across so far.

And I’ve really been looking for it! The other day I had an argument with a friend, after we walked to an old V2 launch pad in Westphalia. Today just an overgrown slab of concrete, partly destroyed when a rocket exploded on the site itself. In the vicinity a tree still shows the carvings of a guard stationed where the rockets were fueled on their Meilerwagen trailers. So I argued I could believe the Amerika-Rakete was a real conceptual design, something that actually existed on paper and in the scientists’ minds - be it manned or not. After all, later von Braun did build two-stage rockets once he had the means. My friend challenged me to provide a document, a picture, some sort of proof this is not just a modern myth. A popular scale model means nothing, and who says illustrators don’t just copy from one another? For example the text in my other picture claims to show a wind tunnel model, but it’s clearly just a drawing anyone could have made.

Well, I’m one step further now, thank you very much indeed!
 

Attachments

Orionblamblam

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,421
Reaction score
283
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
That photo was first (to my knowledge) published in Simon's "German Research in World War II," 1947.

It appears to show a model of the "Gleiter A4 V13/e" configuration which truncated the strakes so that they didn't extend to the payload.
 

Attachments

thunaer

Was schön ist, fliegt auch.
Joined
Nov 12, 2012
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Impressive - thanks a lot for sharing!

I was familiar with that designation from here:

http://www.v2werk-oberraderach.de/Irrtuemer/4-I.htm
http://www.v2werk-oberraderach.de/Irrtuemer/5-I.htm

That's why I referred to the rocket tentatively – it’s actually much more effective to look for the “wrong” names A9 + A10 when searching for pictures. I’m basically just looking for aviation art to decorate my desktop, and I enjoy finding out more about “Luftwaffe 1946” projects. From this board I got material which I've never seen before, and you can even name the source books. That’s very generous indeed.

Here you can find over 90 documents like the one you uploaded, though none of them seem to refer to the intercontinental weapon. The material is from the famous Deutsches Museum Munich and the text under “Bestandsgeschichte” scientifically explains why your drawing is so black – it’s a postwar copy made in the U.S. So your document seems to be the real thing!
http://www.digipeer.de/index.php?static=52

Here you have from the same source a diagram calculating a long range ballistic missile flight as early as 1933, before the Peenemünde efforts:
http://www.digipeer.de/index.php?static=32

And this is supposedly a genuine Nasa document:
http://de.scribd.com/doc/17489642/NASA-History-V2-A4-Rocket-Technical-Development-Data-1965
It shows a drawing of the two-stage Aggregat on page 52 (printed page number), but it uses the terms A9 / A10 again. Maybe this paper is a fake? Or they got things wrong in the 60s and thus started the whole trouble with the varying designations today? In my links at the top you can find the diagrams from Nasa page 54 that are supposedly illustrating the A9’s flight, but there they’re differently titled. At least the one reaching Glasgow doesn’t make sense for a two-stage ICBM, and my second link above seems to prove it’s rather meant for the “winged V2” often called A4b or A4 V12.

Anyway I don’t want to argue about who knows the designations better. That spearlike shape is so ingenious and elegant. It’s a real beauty! And the one other vehicle with a surrounding fin narrowing to the top that I can think of is – the space shuttle.

So the wind tunnel model and the black drawing of the “A9” are unique. I found them absolutely nowhere else. Does anyone have something similar of the lower stage, or the two combined? Because that would really prove the scale models and graphics of today are essentialy correct. Even so the material is marvelous. Thanks a lot!
 

Attachments

fredymac

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
1,551
Reaction score
99
Found this 1945 British video on the V-2. Considering how soon this is after the end of WWII, it's interesting to see how much work they had already done in examining the technology.

 

lippischh

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2012
Messages
289
Reaction score
29
Website
www.shapeways.com
On this pdf : https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/b815310.pdf, on page 20 there are grayscale photos of various V-2 rockets. I noticed that the same rockets were photographed once on a 'top' view and another time in a side view.
From Right to left we can recognize : two slightly different Xmas tree wings, the "Gleiter A4 V13/e", the doppeldecker design. Then, three similar ones with sharply swept wings. Their side view show that the wings have a dihedral angle and that there's another surface on the other side. Either a vertical stabilizer or another set of swept wings with an opposite dihedral.
I made a quick drawing in a 3D software and it turned out that it isn't possible for the other surface to be a pair of wings as they attach higher and would show up on the 'top' view. Therefore, It is in my opinion a Y-wing configuration.
 

Attachments

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,758
Reaction score
18
On this pdf : https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/b815310.pdf, on page 20 there are grayscale photos of various V-2 rockets. I noticed that the same rockets were photographed once on a 'top' view and another time in a side view.
From Right to left we can recognize : two slightly different Xmas tree wings, the "Gleiter A4 V13/e", the doppeldecker design. Then, three similar ones with sharply swept wings. Their side view show that the wings have a dihedral angle and that there's another surface on the other side. Either a vertical stabilizer or another set of swept wings with an opposite dihedral.
I made a quick drawing in a 3D software and it turned out that it isn't possible for the other surface to be a pair of wings as they attach higher and would show up on the 'top' view. Therefore, It is in my opinion a Y-wing configuration.
I disagree . . .
Looking at Grzesio's picture, look particularly at the tail fins of the models. In the top row, all the models' fins are lined up North/South, East/West. Looked at from the top, they would look like this :-
+ + + + + + +
Now, on the bottom row, the the three models on the right, the two 'christmas tree' and the gothic delta, have been turned through 90 degrees, to show a side view, but, the remaining four have only been turned through 45-50 degrees. This time, looked at from above, we would see :-
x x x x + + +
Thus, what we are seeing, is not a wing with large dihedral, and a ventral fin, but both wings, the far wing's root being obscured by the missile's body.

cheers,
Robin.
 

lippischh

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Apr 21, 2012
Messages
289
Reaction score
29
Website
www.shapeways.com
On this pdf : https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/b815310.pdf, on page 20 there are grayscale photos of various V-2 rockets. I noticed that the same rockets were photographed once on a 'top' view and another time in a side view.
From Right to left we can recognize : two slightly different Xmas tree wings, the "Gleiter A4 V13/e", the doppeldecker design. Then, three similar ones with sharply swept wings. Their side view show that the wings have a dihedral angle and that there's another surface on the other side. Either a vertical stabilizer or another set of swept wings with an opposite dihedral.
I made a quick drawing in a 3D software and it turned out that it isn't possible for the other surface to be a pair of wings as they attach higher and would show up on the 'top' view. Therefore, It is in my opinion a Y-wing configuration.
I disagree . . .
Looking at Grzesio's picture, look particularly at the tail fins of the models. In the top row, all the models' fins are lined up North/South, East/West. Looked at from the top, they would look like this :-
+ + + + + + +
Now, on the bottom row, the the three models on the right, the two 'christmas tree' and the gothic delta, have been turned through 90 degrees, to show a side view, but, the remaining four have only been turned through 45-50 degrees. This time, looked at from above, we would see :-
x x x x + + +
Thus, what we are seeing, is not a wing with large dihedral, and a ventral fin, but both wings, the far wing's root being obscured by the missile's body.

cheers,
Robin.
Yes, I agree. The clearer images show that I was mistaken.
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,758
Reaction score
18
No worries . . .
The question I have, in regard to these winged A-4 derivatives, is what method was to be used to ensure that the missile ended up in a wings level attitude after re-entry, in order to glide successfully ? Obviously, a manned version would have a pilot on board to perform this task, but what about an unmanned vehicle ?
Ironically, Lippischh's large dihedral concept should be successful in this task . . .

cheers,
robin.
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,758
Reaction score
18
So a similar system to the one used in the V-1 . . .

cheers,
Robin.
 

Grzesio

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
213
Reaction score
20
Website
chemnitzer27kb.blogspot.com
Yes, but winged A 4 had its steering electrically driven. And so batteries had to be bigger than in a regular A 4 (due to longer time of flight) and servo motors stronger (due to enlarged rudders). :)
 
Top