A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

V-4 Missile Possibilities



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 5th 04, 06:35 PM
robert arndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default V-4 Missile Possibilities

After reviewing the information provided on Unicraft's V-4 page, I
took a look at the dimensions of the missile and the ramjet engine,
which is definately not an Argus or Lorin type.
The Pabst ramjet, however, matches exactly in dimension and
configuration. It had been successfully tested as evidenced by this
1944 photo:

http://www.germanvtol.com/tribflugfolder/5treib.jpg

The question is if the ramjet was good enough to be mounted on the
missile and production of a number of missiles could have occured in
the early months of 1945. The Pabst ramjet was to be used on the Fw
Triebflugel but that aircraft was never built, neither was the radical
Epps Omega Diskus which would have also used the ramjet.
However, the story of the threat to use this weapon against Sweden is
known. Ian Hogg mentions the V-4 briefly in his "German Secret Weapons
of the Second World War"... but gives no clear description of the
missile except to say it was generally thought to refer to the
Peenemunde A-9/A-10 ICBM project. Anyway, a Swedish diplomat claimed
to know all about the V-4 project in 1945 and when Hitler was
informed, he laughed and called the diplomat a conman. Hogg uses this
to discredit the entire project, implying it didn't exist if Hitler
wasn't aware of it.
But I disagree. Hitler is only claiming that the diplomat didn't know
what he was talking about when he claimed to know "all about the V-4".
Missile launch ramps constructed in Poland and the German diplomatic
warning to Stockholm over the V-4 threat contradict Hogg's beliefs.
Anyway, the Russians who captured the launch areas moved all the
German missile testing to N-II-88, Kaliningrad (former Konigsberg).
There, they tested the Wasserfall, Schmetterling, and other captured
missile technology.
It is interesting that a few years later Russia was building missiles
originating from these German designs and guidance systems, although
improved by captured German scientists. It is claimed that the V-4
missile was actually turned into a SAM- the Lavochkin La-219 (V-300).
Here is a pic of that 1949 missile:

http://libraryautomation.com/nymas/Lavochkinmissle.jpg

Of similar dimensions, minus ramjet propulsion. No conclusions there.
The only thing I can think of is that many of the postwar "Ghost
Rocket" sightings in the Baltic (coming from Peenemunde) might have
been either extended range V-1s or maybe appearances of the mysterious
V-4.

Rob
Ads
  #2  
Old January 5th 04, 11:28 PM
B2431
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From: (robert arndt)


After reviewing the information provided on Unicraft's V-4 page, I
took a look at the dimensions of the missile and the ramjet engine,
which is definately not an Argus or Lorin type.
The Pabst ramjet, however, matches exactly in dimension and
configuration. It had been successfully tested as evidenced by this
1944 photo:

http://www.germanvtol.com/tribflugfolder/5treib.jpg


That photograph only proves a piece of apparatus that may or may not be a ram
jet test stand was built at some time and was photographed using poor quality
equipment. It doesn't seem to be a running engine of any kind. If memory serves
a ram jet needs at least 200 knots intake velocity. The "ram jet" in that
picture doesn't seem to be moving at all let alone at that velocity.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

  #3  
Old January 5th 04, 11:53 PM
steve gallacci
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



B2431 wrote:

From: (robert arndt)



After reviewing the information provided on Unicraft's V-4 page, I
took a look at the dimensions of the missile and the ramjet engine,
which is definately not an Argus or Lorin type.
The Pabst ramjet, however, matches exactly in dimension and
configuration. It had been successfully tested as evidenced by this
1944 photo:

http://www.germanvtol.com/tribflugfolder/5treib.jpg


That photograph only proves a piece of apparatus that may or may not be a ram
jet test stand was built at some time and was photographed using poor quality
equipment. It doesn't seem to be a running engine of any kind. If memory serves
a ram jet needs at least 200 knots intake velocity. The "ram jet" in that
picture doesn't seem to be moving at all let alone at that velocity.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired


The thingy is in a windtunnel. I didn't think the "V-4" ramjet looked
all that much like a Pabst ramjet though. Still think it might have been
a Rheinbote like missile with a ramjet sustainer, which could have been
done with a minimum of effort.
  #4  
Old January 6th 04, 07:08 PM
robert arndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

steve gallacci wrote in message ...
B2431 wrote:

From: (robert arndt)



After reviewing the information provided on Unicraft's V-4 page, I
took a look at the dimensions of the missile and the ramjet engine,
which is definately not an Argus or Lorin type.
The Pabst ramjet, however, matches exactly in dimension and
configuration. It had been successfully tested as evidenced by this
1944 photo:

http://www.germanvtol.com/tribflugfolder/5treib.jpg


That photograph only proves a piece of apparatus that may or may not be a ram
jet test stand was built at some time and was photographed using poor quality
equipment. It doesn't seem to be a running engine of any kind. If memory serves
a ram jet needs at least 200 knots intake velocity. The "ram jet" in that
picture doesn't seem to be moving at all let alone at that velocity.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired


The thingy is in a windtunnel.


First of all, it's not a "thingy". It is positively a Pabst ramjet as
evidenced by its connection to one of the Fw Triebflugel's wings seen
in the photo. And it is being windtunnel tested.

I didn't think the "V-4" ramjet looked
all that much like a Pabst ramjet though.


Really? OK, here's a comparison of all the late-war ramjets available
to the Germans:

Lorin: http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/His...o17/Do-217.jpg
Argus 044: http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/Lis...3/As-044_1.jpg
Pabst ramjet sketch:
http://www.germanvtol.com/tribflugfolder/3trieb.jpg
Pabst ramjet for Fw Ta 283: http;//www.luft46.com/fw/fwta283.html

Still think it might have been
a Rheinbote like missile with a ramjet sustainer, which could have been
done with a minimum of effort.


On the Unicraft page the first depiction shows the V-4 missile with a
RATO unit slung underneath for catapult launch. Rhinebote was powered
by a rocket engine and launched off a SSM erector. The V-4 was
launched like the V-1:

V-1 catapult piston unit:
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org...es/lrg1260.jpg
V-1 launched off ramp, dropping piston unit:
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org...es/lrg1271.jpg

Compared to:

Rheinbote on erector:
http://www.worldwar.nl/secretweapons/rheinb_02.jpg

They are nothing alike. Rheinbote was a short range artillery missile
with a mere 40 kg warhead. The V-4, OTOH, was a long range flying bomb
designed to hit targets in Sweden from Misdroy (incidentally, where a
V-3 gun also was used to hit Luxembourg).

The two other depictions of the V-4 on the Unicraft page suggest
postwar research done by the Russians at N-II-88. The V-4 on top of
the V-2 looks remarkably similar to the Russian EKR concept, but in
that case the V-4 was replaced with a Sanger-looking missile.

Rob
  #5  
Old January 7th 04, 12:20 AM
Alan Minyard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 6 Jan 2004 10:08:29 -0800, (robert arndt) wrote:

steve gallacci wrote in message ...
B2431 wrote:

From:
(robert arndt)


After reviewing the information provided on Unicraft's V-4 page, I
took a look at the dimensions of the missile and the ramjet engine,
which is definately not an Argus or Lorin type.
The Pabst ramjet, however, matches exactly in dimension and
configuration. It had been successfully tested as evidenced by this
1944 photo:

http://www.germanvtol.com/tribflugfolder/5treib.jpg


That photograph only proves a piece of apparatus that may or may not be a ram
jet test stand was built at some time and was photographed using poor quality
equipment. It doesn't seem to be a running engine of any kind. If memory serves
a ram jet needs at least 200 knots intake velocity. The "ram jet" in that
picture doesn't seem to be moving at all let alone at that velocity.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired


The thingy is in a windtunnel.


First of all, it's not a "thingy". It is positively a Pabst ramjet as
evidenced by its connection to one of the Fw Triebflugel's wings seen
in the photo. And it is being windtunnel tested.

I didn't think the "V-4" ramjet looked
all that much like a Pabst ramjet though.


Really? OK, here's a comparison of all the late-war ramjets available
to the Germans:

Lorin: http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/His...o17/Do-217.jpg
Argus 044: http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/Lis...3/As-044_1.jpg
Pabst ramjet sketch:
http://www.germanvtol.com/tribflugfolder/3trieb.jpg
Pabst ramjet for Fw Ta 283: http;//www.luft46.com/fw/fwta283.html

Still think it might have been
a Rheinbote like missile with a ramjet sustainer, which could have been
done with a minimum of effort.


On the Unicraft page the first depiction shows the V-4 missile with a
RATO unit slung underneath for catapult launch. Rhinebote was powered
by a rocket engine and launched off a SSM erector. The V-4 was
launched like the V-1:

V-1 catapult piston unit:
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org...es/lrg1260.jpg
V-1 launched off ramp, dropping piston unit:
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org...es/lrg1271.jpg

Compared to:

Rheinbote on erector:
http://www.worldwar.nl/secretweapons/rheinb_02.jpg

They are nothing alike. Rheinbote was a short range artillery missile
with a mere 40 kg warhead. The V-4, OTOH, was a long range flying bomb
designed to hit targets in Sweden from Misdroy (incidentally, where a
V-3 gun also was used to hit Luxembourg).

The two other depictions of the V-4 on the Unicraft page suggest
postwar research done by the Russians at N-II-88. The V-4 on top of
the V-2 looks remarkably similar to the Russian EKR concept, but in
that case the V-4 was replaced with a Sanger-looking missile.

Rob


Reality check time Rob, the Nazis lost, Hitler is dead, and the "V-4"
never flew. I know that all of these facts just break your little Nazi loving
heart, but they are facts.

Al Minyard
  #6  
Old January 7th 04, 01:08 AM
steve gallacci
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


First of all, it's not a "thingy". It is positively a Pabst ramjet as
evidenced by its connection to one of the Fw Triebflugel's wings seen
in the photo. And it is being windtunnel tested.


That, except for the Triebflg. wing (more likely a simple streamlined
strut)was what I was suggesting. The guy was being a dunderhead. Of
course it wasn't moving, it was a test article in a wind tunnel! Jeez.

I didn't think the "V-4" ramjet looked
all that much like a Pabst ramjet though.


Really? OK, here's a comparison of all the late-war ramjets available
to the Germans:


The Pabst engines were usually proportionally shorter, but all in all,
that isn't all that important.

Still think it might have been
a Rheinbote like missile with a ramjet sustainer, which could have been
done with a minimum of effort.


On the Unicraft page the first depiction shows the V-4 missile with a
RATO unit slung underneath for catapult launch. Rhinebote was powered
by a rocket engine and launched off a SSM erector. The V-4 was
launched like the V-1:


You're not thinking like an engineer. The Rheinbote was a dirt simple
rocket stack, a tube with fuel and fins. To rethink the function with a
ramjet instead of solids is almost a no-brainer. That makes the
development of the "V-4" more credible, even if it wasn't done by the
Rheinbote team, anyone with some ramjet R&D and even a hint of a notion
of V-1 or Rheinbote ops could easily put it together.

The two other depictions of the V-4 on the Unicraft page suggest
postwar research done by the Russians at N-II-88. The V-4 on top of
the V-2 looks remarkably similar to the Russian EKR concept, but in
that case the V-4 was replaced with a Sanger-looking missile.


I suspect the "V-4" on top of an A-4 was little more than wishful
thinking at the time.

For that matter, the "V-4" was likely little more than a vaporware
threat rather than a credible piece of hardware.
  #8  
Old January 7th 04, 03:27 AM
robert arndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Reality check time Rob, the Nazis lost, Hitler is dead, and the "V-4"
never flew. I know that all of these facts just break your little Nazi loving
heart, but they are facts.

Al Minyard


Hey Al, take a trip to Misdroy... but don't trip on the remnants of
the launch catapults for the V-4, which are not pointing West. I guess
your logic suggests that the Germans were just firing missiles out
into the Baltic for practice and that the diplomatic threat to Sweden
in 1945 was just a ruse (ignoring the fact that Germany depended on
Sweden's iron ore for vital war production).
But that's you Al, in a nutshell... someone who prefers inaccurate
history book "official histories" as opposed to the truth.
Ignorance is bliss, so be happy

Rob
  #10  
Old January 7th 04, 06:58 PM
robert arndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

steve gallacci wrote in message ...
First of all, it's not a "thingy". It is positively a Pabst ramjet as
evidenced by its connection to one of the Fw Triebflugel's wings seen
in the photo. And it is being windtunnel tested.


That, except for the Triebflg. wing (more likely a simple streamlined
strut)was what I was suggesting. The guy was being a dunderhead. Of
course it wasn't moving, it was a test article in a wind tunnel! Jeez.


You're possibly correct on the wing except that other simlar test rigs
don't match the Triebflugels wing. Anyway the pic is from a
Triebflugel site.

I didn't think the "V-4" ramjet looked
all that much like a Pabst ramjet though.

Really? OK, here's a comparison of all the late-war ramjets available
to the Germans:


The Pabst engines were usually proportionally shorter, but all in all,
that isn't all that important.


It is when compared to the two other available ramjet engines of which
we both agree CANNOT be the one depicted above the V-4. The Germans
didn't have any other types...

Still think it might have been
a Rheinbote like missile with a ramjet sustainer, which could have been
done with a minimum of effort.

On the Unicraft page the first depiction shows the V-4 missile with a
RATO unit slung underneath for catapult launch. Rhinebote was powered
by a rocket engine and launched off a SSM erector. The V-4 was
launched like the V-1:


You're not thinking like an engineer. The Rheinbote was a dirt simple
rocket stack, a tube with fuel and fins. To rethink the function with a
ramjet instead of solids is almost a no-brainer. That makes the
development of the "V-4" more credible, even if it wasn't done by the
Rheinbote team, anyone with some ramjet R&D and even a hint of a notion
of V-1 or Rheinbote ops could easily put it together.


Not possible at all at that time. The V-1 (aka Fi-103, FZG-76) took
years to develop. Rheinbote was started in 1943. One is a short range
artillery rocket, the other a long range flying bomb meant to hit
Sweden. There's no comparison between the two other than you thinking
it is a derivative of the Rheinbote due to (I assume) general
appearance without the ramjet. BTW, an engineer cannot simply strap on
an experimental ramjet onto a Rheinbote-like missile, add wings, and
hope it makes it to Sweden. On Misdroy they had catapults aimed
towards Sweden, not the West. The ramps were for the V-4. Misdroy was
also the testing ground for the long-range V-3 weapon which fired
shells at Luxembourg. The Rheinbote, OTOH, was made by
Rheinmetall-Borsig and used to shell Antwerp in Nov '44- 220 being
fired. Its maximum range was 135 miles. No Rheinbote was on Misdroy.
Misdroy was the testing ground for long-range missiles and shells.

The two other depictions of the V-4 on the Unicraft page suggest
postwar research done by the Russians at N-II-88. The V-4 on top of
the V-2 looks remarkably similar to the Russian EKR concept, but in
that case the V-4 was replaced with a Sanger-looking missile.


I suspect the "V-4" on top of an A-4 was little more than wishful
thinking at the time.

For that matter, the "V-4" was likely little more than a vaporware
threat rather than a credible piece of hardware.


It wouldn't make any sense to threaten a neutral nation like Sweden
with a non-existant weapon in 1945 with the Allies closing in on
Germany. If you remember postwar it was Sweden that complained about
the "Ghost Rockets" coming from the same region. Most "Ghost Rockets"
were described as long cigar-shaped burning objects. These were
suspected of being Russian modified extended-body V-1s but looking at
the V-4... it looks like a strong possibility, especially if a Swede
saw it from below, the ramjet unseen burning above the body.

Rob
 




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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Australia to participate in US missile defence program David Bromage Military Aviation 40 December 13th 03 02:52 PM
AIM-54 Phoenix missile Sujay Vijayendra Military Aviation 89 November 3rd 03 10:47 PM
Poland: French Missile Report Was Wrong Michael Petukhov Military Aviation 8 October 7th 03 10:54 PM
Surface to Air Missile threat PlanetJ Instrument Flight Rules 1 August 14th 03 02:13 PM
Rafael's AIM-AIR IR Missile Countermeasure JT Military Aviation 8 July 13th 03 03:41 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.