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

Winged V-2, A-8 rocket and manned A-9

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
7,915
Reaction score
1,164
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Yet more blatant commercialism in the form of three brief documents on the topics listed in the subject line...
http://www.up-ship.com/drawndoc/V-2advancedani.gif

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=250138340542&ssPageName=ADME:L:LCA:US:31

The short form on the "A-8" is that it was a study for a stretched and differently-fueled V-2... no wings, no people, no recon capability. Just an improved-performance and lower-cost V-2.
 
K

Kiwiguy

Guest
The short form on the "A-8" is that it was a study for a stretched and differently-fueled V-2... no wings, no people, no recon capability. Just an improved-performance and lower-cost V-2.

Not so... the A-8 was a solution to the problem of Lafferenz Capsules and the decomposition of Hydrogen peroxide required to spin the A-4 turbo-pumps. The first Lafferenz capsule built at Sichau Dockyards at Elbing was a 300 ton capsule for the A-4.

Towing trials were conducted by U-1063 (some say U-1053) in the Baltic. There may have also been A-4 launch trials as part of Pruffstand XII or Operation Schwimveste, but I have not research that and cannot vouch the claim.

It was realised that hydrogen peroxide would not last the 30 day voyage to New York. It was also realised that a Laffernz capsule would not successfully survive air patrols around Long Island so there was also a requirement for a longer ranged missile and one with storable fuels.

The A-8 missile was conceived to use Nitric acid oxidiser and diesel fuel pressurised with nitrogen. The concept called for a larger airframe than the A-4, thus the production Lafferenz Capsules grew to 500 tons. These three capsules were captured by the Soviets at Vulkanwerft Stettiner in 1944. The original 300 ton capsule was never found after the war.

The A-8 was not a lower cost V-2. The cost of developing a new A-8 missile was seen as prohibative by Degenkolb, from Speer's Ministry. Indeed Speer wanted to close down Peenemunde altogether in February 1943 if you read Dornberger's book.

Dornberger recounts that to save the A-4 project he was required to freeze the A-4 design and make no further modifications because only by privatising Penemunde could the 700 million Reichsmark development costs be amortised.

The proposal by Degenkolb put to Dornberger by Prof Hettlage was for a private company to buy the V-2 production rights so that Peenemunde development costs could be charged up as a part of the unit cost. ("V-2" page 84-85)

The company which won the tender was AEG which by 1944 was 80% owned by General Electric International (GEI) which was an offshore holding company for General Electric Corporation of USA. Before the war in 1941 GEC was a direct 30 % shareholder in AEG with other interests too in Osram.

GEC President Gerard Swope had directorships in AEG and National City bank which funneled funds to Nazi Germany from Wall Street. Clark Haynes Minor, president of GEI was also a director in AEG.

In a very real sense the nazis could not afford to fund A-4 production themselves without Wall St finance. Hettlage said as much to Dornberger and this is published fact. Without GEC funding for V-2 production (via third parties) the A-4 raids would never have happened.

Against this backdrop the A-8 missile with it's 600km range was seen as yet another unaffordable 700 million Reichsmark project. It was in any case superseded by the A4b winged V-2 with superior performance.

The A4b or more correctly A-9 actually grew out of the A-6 concept.
 

Grzesio

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
249
Reaction score
63
Website
chemnitzer27kb.blogspot.com
It was realised that hydrogen peroxide would not last the 30 day voyage to New York.
The REAL problem, as far as the Lafferenz project and A 4 missile are concerned, is not hydrogen peroxide driving fuel pumps, but liquid oxygen - oxidizer for the main engine, as LOX cannot be prevented from evaporating.

Regards

Grzesio
 

Similar threads

Top