WeserFlug P.1003 Compared to V-22 Osprey

[robert arndt]

http://www.luft46.com/misc/wes1003.html

Rob

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
(robert arndt) wrote:

> http://www.luft46.com/misc/wes1003.html

"Although this was a very novel idea for an aircraft at this time, the
concept never left the drawing board."

1/15 the loaded weight of the Osprey, some very optimistic numbers (400
MPH? Yeah, Right.), and no grasp of the difficulties in gearing and
power issues in a tilt-wing aircraft. The Nazis had a lot of Really
Cool Ideas that would have never worked (like the Sanger "America
Bomber," which would have melted quite nicely the first time they did a
reentry).

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[The Enlightenment]

Chad Irby > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> (robert arndt) wrote:
>
> > http://www.luft46.com/misc/wes1003.html
>
> "Although this was a very novel idea for an aircraft at this time, the
> concept never left the drawing board."
>
> 1/15 the loaded weight of the Osprey, some very optimistic numbers (400
> MPH? Yeah, Right.), and no grasp of the difficulties in gearing and
> power issues in a tilt-wing aircraft.

So you say they had "no grasp". They had built and put into naval
service in 1943 the Fletner Fl 282 Kolibri (hummingbird) intermeshing
rotor helicopter which was entirely succesfull despite the technology
of gearbox designe.
The only thing that prevented the production run of 70 extending to
1000 was allied bombing.
http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Rotary/flettner/HE6.htm

They had flown and tested the Focke Achgelis Fa-223 Drache which has
the same configuration in vertical flight of the V22 and P.1003.

http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Dictionary/Fa_223/DI52.htm



> The Nazis had a lot of Really
> Cool Ideas that would have never worked (like the Sanger "America
> Bomber," which would have melted quite nicely the first time they did a
> reentry).

How do you know? The aircraft never re-entered at full orbital
velocity, it skipped at sub orbital velocities to reach the required
range, take opportunity of cooling effects and a lower speed of
re-entry.

The wedge shapped wing profile shows a keen understanding of
supersonic aerodynamics.

The Germans had solved the hypersonic and heat shielding re-entry
problems of the V2.

They developed SR71 A12 like chine strakes becuase their theory and
supersonic wind tunnels allowed them to:
http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/a9a10.htm

Perhaps Eugene Sanger was a dreamer but he was heading in the correct
direction defining the problems that needed to be solved and then
solving them. He got pretty damed close and a testing program would
have refined the detail to a workable solution.

He for instance ground tested his regeneratively cooled LOX/Kerosene
engine at an Isp of 306 seconds. That's an entirely modern
performance.
http://www.luft46.com/misc/sanger.html

A lot of the work supersonic and hypersonic that the Germans did in
the Nazi era at Penemunde fed straight into the US. Walter Dornberger
(Head of the V2 program) ended up working for Bell.

http://www.astronautix.com/craft/dynasoar.htm

http://www.luft46.com/misc/sanger.html
After the war, he was asked to work (along with mathematician Irene
Bredt) for the French Air Ministry, where in a bizarre plot, he was
almost kidnapped by Stalin, who recognized the value of the Amerika
Bomber.

The US could do with a few more Nazi Era engineers. Apart from Bono
and Hudson things have been **** with the US space program since they
retired.

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
(The Enlightenment) wrote:

> Chad Irby > wrote in message
> >...
> > In article >,
> > (robert arndt) wrote:
> >
> > > http://www.luft46.com/misc/wes1003.html
> >
> > "Although this was a very novel idea for an aircraft at this time, the
> > concept never left the drawing board."
> >
> > 1/15 the loaded weight of the Osprey, some very optimistic numbers (400
> > MPH? Yeah, Right.), and no grasp of the difficulties in gearing and
> > power issues in a tilt-wing aircraft.
>
> So you say they had "no grasp". They had built and put into naval
> service in 1943 the Fletner Fl 282 Kolibri (hummingbird) intermeshing
> rotor helicopter which was entirely succesfull despite the technology
> of gearbox designe.

So you're comparing a small helicopter with two fixed rotors and a
simple fixed gearbox with a full-up tiltwing aircraft?

> The only thing that prevented the production run of 70 extending to
> 1000 was allied bombing.
> http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Rotary/flettner/HE6.htm

Still, comparing a simple little helo to a tiltrotor.

That's funny.

> They had flown and tested the Focke Achgelis Fa-223 Drache which has
> the same configuration in vertical flight of the V22 and P.1003.
>
> http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Dictionary/Fa_223/DI52.htm

You might note that the FA-223 was a twin-rotor *helicopter*, not a
tiltrotor. Besides having the rotors out on booms at the sides, it was
not really very complicated (and slow, due to the massively increased
drag of those two side booms).

Once again, nothing like a tiltrotor, and nothing in these designs would
have prepared them for the problems inherent in tiltrotor flight. And
it *sure* wouldn't have let them build a 400 MPH tiltrotor right off the
bat.

> > The Nazis had a lot of Really Cool Ideas that would have never
> > worked (like the Sanger "America Bomber," which would have melted
> > quite nicely the first time they did a reentry).
>
> How do you know? The aircraft never re-entered at full orbital
> velocity, it skipped at sub orbital velocities to reach the required
> range, take opportunity of cooling effects and a lower speed of
> re-entry.

Actually, skip-reentry relies on a somewhat higher initial reentry
speed, as compared to the "plunge" method, and while max temps can be
higher, the plunge method has some advantages. Note also that the
"skip" method relies heavily on radiative heat emission, and that's not
very effective for dumping large amounts of heat in a short period of
time. You still need some very high-temp metals (Inconel or titanium,
to start), instead of the normal stainless steel Sanger proposed.

Even the X-15, which wasn't anywhere near as ambitious as the
Silverbird, had to have sprayed-on ablative coatings to hit high Mach.
The only reason the Dynasoar project went as far as it did was because
of the development work on the X-15.

Sanger never actually worked on the thermodynamic aspect of the
Silverbird, and that would have been a potential showstopper for the
program, even if he'd had more time to work on it. The plane was a
concept/mockup only, and very little actual engineering work had been
done when the war came to an end.

> The wedge shapped wing profile shows a keen understanding of
> supersonic aerodynamics.

No, it just showed a basic understanding of high-speed flight. Small
wings = high wing loading = higher speeds and lower maneuverability.
Landing speeds would have been high, even when empty.

> The Germans had solved the hypersonic and heat shielding re-entry
> problems of the V2.

....by not flying it at high hypersonic speeds for very long. The V-2
topped out at about 3500 MPH on reentry, and only managed that for a
very short time, in uncontrolled ballistic flight.

Nothing like the 13,000 MPH the Sanger was supposed to hit.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[The Enlightenment]

"Chad Irby" > wrote in message
m...
> In article >,
> (The Enlightenment) wrote:
>
> > Chad Irby > wrote in message
> > >...
> > > In article >,
> > > (robert arndt) wrote:
> > >
> > > > http://www.luft46.com/misc/wes1003.html
> > >
> > > "Although this was a very novel idea for an aircraft at this
time, the
> > > concept never left the drawing board."
> > >
> > > 1/15 the loaded weight of the Osprey, some very optimistic
numbers (400
> > > MPH? Yeah, Right.), and no grasp of the difficulties in gearing
and
> > > power issues in a tilt-wing aircraft.
> >
> > So you say they had "no grasp". They had built and put into naval
> > service in 1943 the Fletner Fl 282 Kolibri (hummingbird)
intermeshing
> > rotor helicopter which was entirely succesfull despite the
technology
> > of gearbox designe.
>
> So you're comparing a small helicopter with two fixed rotors and a
> simple fixed gearbox with a full-up tiltwing aircraft?

In hovering fligh it has the same control configuration as a tilt
rotor in hovering flight.

>
> > The only thing that prevented the production run of 70 extending
to
> > 1000 was allied bombing.
> > http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Rotary/flettner/HE6.htm
>
> Still, comparing a simple little helo to a tiltrotor.
>
> That's funny.


Not at all. The controlability issues of hovering flight had been
solved.

What remains is lighter transmissions and powerplants and the problem
of transition from hovering to horizontal flight.


>
> > They had flown and tested the Focke Achgelis Fa-223 Drache which
has
> > the same configuration in vertical flight of the V22 and P.1003.
> >
> > http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Dictionary/Fa_223/DI52.htm
>
> You might note that the FA-223 was a twin-rotor *helicopter*, not a
> tiltrotor. Besides having the rotors out on booms at the sides, it
was
> not really very complicated (and slow, due to the massively
increased
> drag of those two side booms).

Now encase the booms inside wings that can tilt.

>
> Once again, nothing like a tiltrotor, and nothing in these designs
would
> have prepared them for the problems inherent in tiltrotor flight.
And
> it *sure* wouldn't have let them build a 400 MPH tiltrotor right off
the
> bat.

The small wings of tilt totors reduces drag considerably and helps
speed. Not having the propeller wash flowing over the fueselage also
helps. Lets assume they were wrong. Would you accept 330mph?
300mph?

Just an aside. When the XV-15 prototype for the XV-22 osprey was
built is was powered by the Allison T-53 (same as the huey). That
engine was designed by Franz Anselm, the same guy that designed the
jumo 004B for the Me 262 of WW2.

Anselm also designed the engine for the M1 Abrams tank.


>
> > > The Nazis had a lot of Really Cool Ideas that would have never
> > > worked (like the Sanger "America Bomber," which would have
melted
> > > quite nicely the first time they did a reentry).
> >
> > How do you know? The aircraft never re-entered at full orbital
> > velocity, it skipped at sub orbital velocities to reach the
required
> > range, take opportunity of cooling effects and a lower speed of
> > re-entry.
>
> Actually, skip-reentry relies on a somewhat higher initial reentry
> speed, as compared to the "plunge" method, and while max temps can
be
> higher, the plunge method has some advantages. Note also that the
> "skip" method relies heavily on radiative heat emission, and that's
not
> very effective for dumping large amounts of heat in a short period
of
> time.

Indeed but thats not a problem for winged re-entry vehicles that
unlike blunt bodies can fly and control their rate of entry hopefully
limiting the rate of hest buildup to that which can be radiated.


> You still need some very high-temp metals (Inconel or titanium,
> to start), instead of the normal stainless steel Sanger proposed.


Sangers aircraft the 'silver bird' was made of the high chrome steel
(stainless basically as used in the XB70 ) and I expect similar to
what was used in Boiler Tubes at the time. That can opperate at 600C
without loosing strength and beyond at reduced strength. Stainless
is more heat resistant than titanium and but less than inconel.

>
> Even the X-15, which wasn't anywhere near as ambitious as the
> Silverbird, had to have sprayed-on ablative coatings to hit high
Mach.
> The only reason the Dynasoar project went as far as it did was
because
> of the development work on the X-15.
>
> Sanger never actually worked on the thermodynamic aspect of the
> Silverbird, and that would have been a potential showstopper for the
> program, even if he'd had more time to work on it. The plane was a
> concept/mockup only, and very little actual engineering work had
been
> done when the war came to an end.

Sure, sanger didn't know that blunt bodies provide some thermal
protection.

Here is the Sanger Thermal protection system.

The Sanger silver bird is stainless steel. Pilot and critical
components such as tires, control and crew cabin are insulted from the
over 600C heat of re-entry for as long as necesaary.

This is how I think it would have been tested:
1 The vehicle is run down its sled at mach 0.5, then mach 0.9 and
finaly mach 1.05 and mach 1.3.

2 Seperation tests from the sled are then performed with the vehicle
landing without powering up.

3 The vehicle is then powered up and aerodynamic and thermal
protection data is accumulated at progesssively higher speeds.

3 Sanger can land like a plane and it can carry a standard german test
pilot heinkel ejection seat for test pilot safety. This speeds up
testing becuase the vehicle is recoverable.

4 At some point they probably find hot spots than need better thermal
protection.

5 At that point they either have a technical fix (grapahite, high
nickel steels) or cooling systems (water or helium refrigerator like
the dyna soar)

> > The wedge shapped wing profile shows a keen understanding of
> > supersonic aerodynamics.
>
> No, it just showed a basic understanding of high-speed flight.
Small
> wings = high wing loading = higher speeds and lower maneuverability.
> Landing speeds would have been high, even when empty.

It had a flat body to help both hypersonic re entry and landing and
braking parachutes.

If you look at the wings they are like triangular wedges like a
Sparrow missile.


>
> > The Germans had solved the hypersonic and heat shielding re-entry
> > problems of the V2
>
> ...by not flying it at high hypersonic speeds for very long. The
V-2
> topped out at about 3500 MPH on reentry, and only managed that for a
> very short time, in uncontrolled ballistic flight.

They had a heat shield. Graphite and plywood that turned to graphite.
No doubt other materials were in development. Eg dibule walled skins,
ablatives etc.
They had a problem defined and thus they could set about solving it.


>
> Nothing like the 13,000 MPH the Sanger was supposed to hit.

Maybe Sanger would only have handeled a lower speed. say Mach 6 or
mach 10 instead of Mach 20. Sanger MkII on the otherhand?

[Chad Irby]

Breaking this into different posts, instead of one monster...

In article >,
"The Enlightenment" > wrote:

> "Chad Irby" > wrote in message
> m...
> > In article >,
> > (The Enlightenment) wrote:
> >
> > > So you say they had "no grasp". They had built and put into
> > > naval service in 1943 the Fletner Fl 282 Kolibri (hummingbird)
> > > intermeshing rotor helicopter which was entirely succesfull
> > > despite the technology of gearbox designe.
> >
> > So you're comparing a small helicopter with two fixed rotors and a
> > simple fixed gearbox with a full-up tiltwing aircraft?
>
> In hovering fligh it has the same control configuration as a tilt
> rotor in hovering flight.

Exactly.

Comparing a simple helicopter to a workable tilt-wing is just plain
stupid.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
"The Enlightenment" > wrote:

> "Chad Irby" > wrote in message
> m...

> > Still, comparing a simple little helo to a tiltrotor.
> >
> > That's funny.
>
>
> Not at all. The controlability issues of hovering flight had been
> solved.
>
> What remains is lighter transmissions and powerplants and the problem
> of transition from hovering to horizontal flight.

....and the technical problems inherent in that took over twenty years,
just to get a decent handle on it, and a half-century to start getting
to the point it's useful.

Any idiot could draw a plane that had a tilt-rotor configuration.
Making one work is a whole different thing.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
"The Enlightenment" > wrote:

> The small wings of tilt totors reduces drag considerably and helps
> speed. Not having the propeller wash flowing over the fueselage also
> helps. Lets assume they were wrong. Would you accept 330mph?
> 300mph?

Try 150, *maybe*, once they got the massive problems involved with
workable tiltrotor configurations out of the way. It's a huge amount of
handwaving, though.

"If magical faries came to Earth and gave them a workable
transmission/power plant setup, and resolved the control problems, then
they might have made the design work..."

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
"The Enlightenment" > wrote:

> "Chad Irby" > wrote in message
> m...
> >
> > Actually, skip-reentry relies on a somewhat higher initial reentry
> > speed, as compared to the "plunge" method, and while max temps can
> > be higher, the plunge method has some advantages. Note also that
> > the "skip" method relies heavily on radiative heat emission, and
> > that's not very effective for dumping large amounts of heat in a
> > short period of time.
>
> Indeed but thats not a problem for winged re-entry vehicles that
> unlike blunt bodies can fly and control their rate of entry hopefully
> limiting the rate of hest buildup to that which can be radiated.

Nope. Velocity is velocity, and coming in out of vacuum means those
steel wings are just little flanges out in the Mach-20 airflow waiting
to be melted - or broken off altogether.

> > You still need some very high-temp metals (Inconel or titanium,
> > to start), instead of the normal stainless steel Sanger proposed.
>
> Sangers aircraft the 'silver bird' was made of the high chrome steel
> (stainless basically as used in the XB70 ) and I expect similar to
> what was used in Boiler Tubes at the time. That can opperate at 600C
> without loosing strength and beyond at reduced strength. Stainless
> is more heat resistant than titanium and but less than inconel.

So the Silverbird could have managed about Mach 3 for a short period of
time, about 1/5 of the *necessary* speed for suborbital missions like
the one it was designed for... and then would have had to be scrapped
due to overheating of the structure.

> > Sanger never actually worked on the thermodynamic aspect of the
> > Silverbird, and that would have been a potential showstopper for
> > the program, even if he'd had more time to work on it. The plane
> > was a concept/mockup only, and very little actual engineering work
> > had been done when the war came to an end.
>
> Sure, sanger didn't know that blunt bodies provide some thermal
> protection.
>
> Here is the Sanger Thermal protection system.
>
> The Sanger silver bird is stainless steel. Pilot and critical
> components such as tires, control and crew cabin are insulted from the
> over 600C heat of re-entry for as long as necesaary.

Insulation of the insides isn't the problem. It's the skin melting off
in a very short period that's the issue, combined with the lack of time
to re-radiate the heat before hitting the atmosphere again. When a
spacecraft hits the atmosphere at Mach 20, the temps reach 9500 degrees.

At a "mere" Mach 6, the X-15 skin reached 650 to 700 degrees C, in a
minute and a half of powered flight. This would have happened to the
Sanger several times per mission, with a skin that didn't have the heat
resistance of the X-15's.

> This is how I think it would have been tested:

(Magical handwaving imaginary ten year test program deleted)

....you also left out the two or three Silverbirds that would have been
lost due to the control problems inherent in supersonic flight. And
then the one or two they would have lost due to the skin peeling off.
And then one or two due to not knowing about how to support a man in
space...

...if the program had ever gotten that far.

> > > The wedge shapped wing profile shows a keen understanding of
> > > supersonic aerodynamics.
> >
> > No, it just showed a basic understanding of high-speed flight.
> > Small wings = high wing loading = higher speeds and lower
> > maneuverability. Landing speeds would have been high, even when
> > empty.
>
> It had a flat body to help both hypersonic re entry and landing and
> braking parachutes.

....and would have come in at 200 MPH or so, like the Shuttle. So add
"develop high speed high load tires" to your development program. And
"redesign aircraft to really handle hypersonic flight."

> If you look at the wings they are like triangular wedges like a
> Sparrow missile.

Um, no. They're closer to the F-104 in shape and cross-section in every
image I've seen of the Silverbird. Much like the X-15 wings, as a
matter of fact.

> > > The Germans had solved the hypersonic and heat shielding re-entry
> > > problems of the V2
> >
> > ...by not flying it at high hypersonic speeds for very long. The
> > V-2 topped out at about 3500 MPH on reentry, and only managed that
> > for a very short time, in uncontrolled ballistic flight.
>
> They had a heat shield. Graphite and plywood that turned to graphite.

....for the minute or two it took to reenter and impact.

> No doubt other materials were in development. Eg dibule walled skins,
> ablatives etc.

Replace "were" with would have to be once they started actually thinking
about it."

> They had a problem defined and thus they could set about solving it.

....in several years. Which they didn't have, and had *not* anticipated
in the original idea.

> > Nothing like the 13,000 MPH the Sanger was supposed to hit.
>
> Maybe Sanger would only have handeled a lower speed. say Mach 6 or
> mach 10 instead of Mach 20.

....and been unable to complete its mission, which relied on long periods
of coasting in between moderate periods of slamming into the atmosphere
at 8,000 to 12,000 MPH and melting that stainless steel skin right off.

Then having to be redesigned for massive amounts of fuel to make up for
not being able to handle the original mission profile.

And a ten-year nuclear program to make a nuke small enough to carry in
the darned thing...

> Sanger MkII on the otherhand?

Sure, and when they got the Ark of the Convenant out of that secret
American storage facility, they would have been unbeatable.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[John Keeney]

"The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Chad Irby" > wrote in message
> > So you're comparing a small helicopter with two fixed rotors and a
> > simple fixed gearbox with a full-up tiltwing aircraft?
>
> In hovering fligh it has the same control configuration as a tilt
> rotor in hovering flight.

Which does not make it the same as a tilt rotor.

> > Still, comparing a simple little helo to a tiltrotor.
> >
> > That's funny.
>
> Not at all. The controlability issues of hovering flight had been
> solved.
>
> What remains is lighter transmissions and powerplants and the problem
> of transition from hovering to horizontal flight.

You seem to be making light of that "transition from hovering to
horizontal flight", it's a bear.

[The Enlightenment]

Chad Irby > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> "The Enlightenment" > wrote:
>
> > "Chad Irby" > wrote in message
> > m...
> > >
> > > Actually, skip-reentry relies on a somewhat higher initial reentry
> > > speed, as compared to the "plunge" method, and while max temps can
> > > be higher, the plunge method has some advantages. Note also that
> > > the "skip" method relies heavily on radiative heat emission, and
> > > that's not very effective for dumping large amounts of heat in a
> > > short period of time.
> >
> > Indeed but thats not a problem for winged re-entry vehicles that
> > unlike blunt bodies can fly and control their rate of entry hopefully
> > limiting the rate of hest buildup to that which can be radiated.
>
> Nope. Velocity is velocity, and coming in out of vacuum means those
> steel wings are just little flanges out in the Mach-20 airflow waiting
> to be melted - or broken off altogether.

Nope. There is someting called a hypersonic L/D (lift to drag ratio).

You can fly in and limit you rate of decent in a winged or lifting
body thus limiting peak heat to the extent that ablatives or even
tiles can be dispensed with.



>
> > > You still need some very high-temp metals (Inconel or titanium,
> > > to start), instead of the normal stainless steel Sanger proposed.
> >
> > Sangers aircraft the 'silver bird' was made of the high chrome steel
> > (stainless basically as used in the XB70 ) and I expect similar to
> > what was used in Boiler Tubes at the time. That can opperate at 600C
> > without loosing strength and beyond at reduced strength. Stainless
> > is more heat resistant than titanium and but less than inconel.
>
> So the Silverbird could have managed about Mach 3 for a short period of
> time, about 1/5 of the *necessary* speed for suborbital missions like
> the one it was designed for... and then would have had to be scrapped
> due to overheating of the structure.

It could have managed more than mach 3 easily. The vehicle could have
achieved sub orbital velocity at 13,000 mph. Re-entered and slowed to
a slower speed say 8,000 mph and skipped to cool of and so on.


>
> > > Sanger never actually worked on the thermodynamic aspect of the
> > > Silverbird, and that would have been a potential showstopper for
> > > the program, even if he'd had more time to work on it. The plane
> > > was a concept/mockup only, and very little actual engineering work
> > > had been done when the war came to an end.
> >
> > Sure, sanger didn't know that blunt bodies provide some thermal
> > protection.
> >
> > Here is the Sanger Thermal protection system.
> >
> > The Sanger silver bird is stainless steel. Pilot and critical
> > components such as tires, control and crew cabin are insulted from the
> > over 600C heat of re-entry for as long as necesaary.
>
> Insulation of the insides isn't the problem. It's the skin melting off
> in a very short period that's the issue, combined with the lack of time
> to re-radiate the heat before hitting the atmosphere again. When a
> spacecraft hits the atmosphere at Mach 20, the temps reach 9500 degrees.
>
> At a "mere" Mach 6, the X-15 skin reached 650 to 700 degrees C, in a
> minute and a half of powered flight. This would have happened to the
> Sanger several times per mission, with a skin that didn't have the heat
> resistance of the X-15's.

Sanger is also higher up in thinner atmosphere. It skips up and down
and was actualy to cruise at more like mach 10.



>
> > This is how I think it would have been tested:
>
> (Magical handwaving imaginary ten year test program deleted)
>
> ...you also left out the two or three Silverbirds that would have been
> lost due to the control problems inherent in supersonic flight. And
> then the one or two they would have lost due to the skin peeling off.
> And then one or two due to not knowing about how to support a man in
> space...

The vehicle had an all moving tail.

Either way Sanger was using the first hypersonic wind tunnel in the
world to test his model.



>
> ...if the program had ever gotten that far.
>
> > > > The wedge shapped wing profile shows a keen understanding of
> > > > supersonic aerodynamics.
> > >
> > > No, it just showed a basic understanding of high-speed flight.
> > > Small wings = high wing loading = higher speeds and lower
> > > maneuverability. Landing speeds would have been high, even when
> > > empty.
> >
> > It had a flat body to help both hypersonic re entry and landing and
> > braking parachutes.
>
> ...and would have come in at 200 MPH or so, like the Shuttle. So add
> "develop high speed high load tires" to your development program. And
> "redesign aircraft to really handle hypersonic flight."
>
> > If you look at the wings they are like triangular wedges like a
> > Sparrow missile.
>
> Um, no. They're closer to the F-104 in shape and cross-section in every
> image I've seen of the Silverbird. Much like the X-15 wings, as a
> matter of fact.

They are triangular wedges. Look closer.


>
> > > > The Germans had solved the hypersonic and heat shielding re-entry
> > > > problems of the V2
> > >
> > > ...by not flying it at high hypersonic speeds for very long. The
> > > V-2 topped out at about 3500 MPH on reentry, and only managed that
> > > for a very short time, in uncontrolled ballistic flight.
> >
> > They had a heat shield. Graphite and plywood that turned to graphite.
>
> ...for the minute or two it took to reenter and impact.
>
> > No doubt other materials were in development. Eg double walled skins,
> > ablatives etc.
>
> Replace "were" with would have to be once they started actually thinking
> about it."

They were thinking about it. They apparently had a ceramics heat
shield program (for Sanger at least it appear) and more than one
hypersonic wind tunnel working on problems.


>
> > They had a problem defined and thus they could set about solving it.
>
> ...in several years. Which they didn't have, and had *not* anticipated
> in the original idea.

Just about everying was anticipated, heat shielding included.


>
> > > Nothing like the 13,000 MPH the Sanger was supposed to hit.
> >
> > Maybe Sanger would only have handeled a lower speed. say Mach 6 or
> > mach 10 instead of Mach 20.
>
> ...and been unable to complete its mission, which relied on long periods
> of coasting in between moderate periods of slamming into the atmosphere
> at 8,000 to 12,000 MPH and melting that stainless steel skin right off.
>
> Then having to be redesigned for massive amounts of fuel to make up for
> not being able to handle the original mission profile.

Getting enough velocity was not the problem. The engines were up to
it. A speed of 13000mph is less than 1/2 the energy required to reach
17,000.

The biggest problem is heat shielding. Sanger had a hypersonic wind
tunnel to test hypersonic L/D. Controll surface effects, stability
and propably even heat build up issues could be tested.


>
> And a ten-year nuclear program to make a nuke small enough to carry in
> the darned thing...

Off topic but The Germans had 25kg of enriched uranium in 1943, more
than the allies. They had developed supersonic centrifuges which is
the modern prefered method of enrichment. No huge gaseous diffusion
plants.


>
> > Sanger MkII on the otherhand?
>
> Sure, and when they got the Ark of the Convenant out of that secret
> American storage facility, they would have been unbeatable.

[Keith Willshaw]

"The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
om...

>
> Off topic but The Germans had 25kg of enriched uranium in 1943, more
> than the allies. They had developed supersonic centrifuges which is
> the modern prefered method of enrichment. No huge gaseous diffusion
> plants.
>

Bull****

The Germans only managed to enrich uranium to around 3.7%
and that only in small laboratory quantities.
They had a centrifuge program which FAILED miserably as did the
rest of their nuclear program. Given that the resources allocated were
extremely modest this is hardly surprising.

The major reason for their failure was the lack of materials
that could cope with the extremely corrosive Uranium Hexafluoride
the enrichment process required. With Germany critically
short of chrome, nickel and other allies the high strength
stainless steel alloys required were simply not available.

In December 1942 Dr Erich Bagge noted in his diary

"Conference in the rooms of the president of the
National Bureau of Standards, State Councilor
Esau. Diebner, Basche, Clusius, Harteck, Bonhoeer,
Wirtz and myself present from the physical
side; the chemists Albers, Schmitz-Dumont and a
third described their attempts to make volatile
uranium compounds [to replace the corrosive
uranium hexauoride in the various isotope-separation
processes]. Esau is getting ready to
throw in the towel in January or February.

It seems that they now think the solution of a
certain problem can have no bearing on the out-come
of the war after all."

The Germans basically gave up high level centrifuge enrichment
at this point and concentrated on low level enrichment for
a power reactor design and they made little progress even on that.
The total budget allocated to German enrichment programs in 1944
was 200,000 Reichmarks. The 3rd and final enrichment
machine to be built (and the only one to work) was run in July
1944 and managed to produce 2.5 grams of Uranium enriched to
3.7%. This was of course a small fraction of the daily output
of the Oak Ridge plant.

They were not only behind the American, British and Soviet
programs but even the Japanese had a better grasp of the basic
physics involved, thats hardly surprising either since most
German physicists had either been expelled or had fled the country.

I suggest you read The Virus House by David Irving.He's not a
historian I'd usually recommend but given that his tendencies are
largely pro German you may find his writing more compelling and you
can down load it free from

http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/VirusHouse/

Keith

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
(The Enlightenment) wrote:

> Chad Irby > wrote in message
> >...

> > Nope. Velocity is velocity, and coming in out of vacuum means those
> > steel wings are just little flanges out in the Mach-20 airflow waiting
> > to be melted - or broken off altogether.
>
> Nope. There is someting called a hypersonic L/D (lift to drag ratio).

Yes, there is. And it tells us why those wings would have melted off.
To get enough lift to bounce the Silverbird out of the atmosphere again,
you have to deal with the drag of having it in the atmosphere for a few
minutes. Certainly long enough and hot enough to melt those little
steel wings, as demonstrated by the short X-15 flights with even tougher
alloys at lower speeds.

> You can fly in and limit you rate of decent in a winged or lifting
> body thus limiting peak heat to the extent that ablatives or even
> tiles can be dispensed with.

Up to a point, but you still have to deal with *extreme* temps, in the
thousands of degrees range instead of hundreds, and boiler-type
stainless is *not* going to do the job, especially in the thicknesses
you need to use in spacecraft. The only way to get a decent lifetime
out of the stuff at Mach 10 would be to make it prohibitively thick, and
replace it after every flight.

> > So the Silverbird could have managed about Mach 3 for a short period of
> > time, about 1/5 of the *necessary* speed for suborbital missions like
> > the one it was designed for... and then would have had to be scrapped
> > due to overheating of the structure.
>
> It could have managed more than mach 3 easily.

For a *very* short period of time, like the Mig-25. Then it would run
out of fuel or melt. Sustained speeds at Mach 3 just aren't feasible
with low-temp alloys.

> The vehicle could have achieved sub orbital velocity at 13,000 mph.

....and melted in extremely short order.

> Re-entered and slowed to a slower speed say 8,000 mph and skipped to
> cool of and so on.

As I've mentioned several times, not with the materials they had
available in 1945. Repeating this false assumption does not make it
suddenly become true.

> > At a "mere" Mach 6, the X-15 skin reached 650 to 700 degrees C, in a
> > minute and a half of powered flight. This would have happened to the
> > Sanger several times per mission, with a skin that didn't have the heat
> > resistance of the X-15's.
>
> Sanger is also higher up in thinner atmosphere.

The X-15 hit Mach 6 and max temp at about the same altitude the Sanger
was supposed to be at when it "skipped."

> It skips up and down and was actualy to cruise at more like mach 10.

And when it reentered the atmosphere, it would melt unless they
redesigned it with better materials.

> > ...you also left out the two or three Silverbirds that would have been
> > lost due to the control problems inherent in supersonic flight. And
> > then the one or two they would have lost due to the skin peeling off.
> > And then one or two due to not knowing about how to support a man in
> > space...
>
> The vehicle had an all moving tail.

An all moving tail is nice, but it's not a prerequisite of super- and
hypersonic flight, and it certainly would not have made the rest of the
design workable.

> Either way Sanger was using the first hypersonic wind tunnel in the
> world to test his model.

And I'm sure that foot-long model would have showed all of the issues
I've mentioned. Oh, wait, it wouldn't. All it did was show how the air
flowed around a solid machined model of the Silverbird.

> > > No doubt other materials were in development. Eg double walled
> > > skins, ablatives etc.
> >
> > Replace "were" with "would have to be once they started actually
> > thinking about it."
>
> They were thinking about it.

Not in any reference I've ever seen. Most of the books I've seen on the
Silverbird are quite adamant that Sanger didn't spend much time on the
bomber after the initial concept, and spent *no* time on heating issues,
other than "it's going to cool off between skips." It was a concept
with a tiny bit of research after the fact, but nothing like what you
imagine it to be. Sanger spent a lot more time on his design for a
ramjet-powered interceptor (which also never flew).

> They apparently had a ceramics heat shield program (for Sanger at
> least it appear) and more than one hypersonic wind tunnel working on
> problems.

Nope. They had *one* hypersonic tunnel in use in 1944, and it had a
very short (~30 sec) operating period (vacuum-operated). The Sanger
model was only tested for general ariflow, and they had *no* facilities
at the time for extended hypersonic flow runs. There were plans to
build a sustained hypersonic tunnel towards the end of the war, but the
Germans never finished it.

> Just about everying was anticipated, heat shielding included.

Sanger spent no time studying the problem before the end of the war.

> The biggest problem is heat shielding. Sanger had a hypersonic wind
> tunnel to test hypersonic L/D. Controll surface effects, stability
> and propably even heat build up issues could be tested.

No, they couldn't. While small hypersonic tunnels are good for general
airflow testing, they're lousy for extrapolating up to full-size
machines.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[robert arndt]

> As I've mentioned several times, not with the materials they had
> available in 1945. Repeating this false assumption does not make it
> suddenly become true.
>
> > > At a "mere" Mach 6, the X-15 skin reached 650 to 700 degrees C, in a
> > > minute and a half of powered flight. This would have happened to the
> > > Sanger several times per mission, with a skin that didn't have the heat
> > > resistance of the X-15's.

You obviously don't know much about the SS Technical Branch and their
work in metallurgy. Documents recovered at Gottingen and Volkenrode
indicate that between 1943-44 the SS were experimenting with a
frictionless metal called "Luftschwamm" (Aerosponge) that could
withstand 1000 degrees Centigrade.
The experimental compound alloy was classified by the US... and
probably found its way onto some of the early US replicated disc
designs at Wright Field.
As I pointed out many threads ago the SS Technical Branch (especially
the E-4 Unit) holds the key to much of the amazing technology
discovered at the close of the war. The SS were put in charge of
developing new manufacturing methods, exotic metallurgy, alternative
fuel sources, energy field weapons, development of chemical and
biological weapons, advanced jet and rocket aircraft, disc aircraft,
and the future of ballistic missile technology. Albert Speer, as
armaments minister, talks about this in his lesser-known book
"Infiltration". Anyone interested in advanced, little known weapons
and all aspects of the SS organisation should read it.

Rob

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
(robert arndt) wrote:

> > As I've mentioned several times, not with the materials they had
> > available in 1945. Repeating this false assumption does not make it
> > suddenly become true.
> >
> > > > At a "mere" Mach 6, the X-15 skin reached 650 to 700 degrees C, in a
> > > > minute and a half of powered flight. This would have happened to the
> > > > Sanger several times per mission, with a skin that didn't have the heat
> > > > resistance of the X-15's.
>
> You obviously don't know much about the SS Technical Branch and their
> work in metallurgy.

Well, you're wrong about that, too. They're mentioned a lot in Leslie
Simon's book "Secret Weapons of the Third Reich," for example. They did
some interesting work, but had a bad tendency to announce new projects
and concepts well before they were finished, and a lot of their stuff
(like the metal you mention) were unfinished research projects. They
werealso crippled by the same tendency shown by most of the Gernam
research establishments, in that they were terrible at communicating
their successes and failures to the rest of their research institutes.

> Documents recovered at Gottingen and Volkenrode
> indicate that between 1943-44 the SS were experimenting with a
> frictionless metal called "Luftschwamm" (Aerosponge) that could
> withstand 1000 degrees Centigrade.

"Experimenting with" and "got to work" are two separate things.

Especially since that mythical metal you just mentioned never saw the
light of day except in some of the more exotic conspiracy theories.

And, again, the folks in the Silverbird project never knew about it,
since their entire design was based on normal, off-the-shelf stainless
steel, since Sanger and his boys never worked out the heat problems of
the concept. That's all it really was, you know... just a neat concept
without any real research behind it.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[B2431]

>From: (robert arndt)
>

<snip>
Albert Speer, as
>armaments minister, talks about this in his lesser-known book
>"Infiltration". Anyone interested in advanced, little known weapons
>and all aspects of the SS organisation should read it.
>
>Rob
>
Albert Speer was a butcher and a liar. His books are full of self agrandizement
and self flagellation to prove his "veracity."

The man was a Nazi swine and should be read with great skepticism.

It was due to his reorginization of armaments after Todt died that dragged the
war on longer than it would have lasted. It was his heavy use of slave labour
and concentration camps that caused a great deal of misery and death. He should
have hanged with the rest. I hope he's rotting in Hell.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[robert arndt]

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> >From: (robert arndt)
> >
>
> <snip>
> Albert Speer, as
> >armaments minister, talks about this in his lesser-known book
> >"Infiltration". Anyone interested in advanced, little known weapons
> >and all aspects of the SS organisation should read it.
> >
> >Rob
> >
> Albert Speer was a butcher and a liar. His books are full of self agrandizement
> and self flagellation to prove his "veracity."
>
> The man was a Nazi swine and should be read with great skepticism.
>
> It was due to his reorginization of armaments after Todt died that dragged the
> war on longer than it would have lasted. It was his heavy use of slave labour
> and concentration camps that caused a great deal of misery and death. He should
> have hanged with the rest. I hope he's rotting in Hell.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Done with your tirade against Speer? I wasn't talking about the man's
morality here or his great organizational skill (which was miraculous
considering nazi duplicity and hoarding of materials).
What I was pointing out is that his book "Infiltration" opens up the
entire SS organization which was a state-within-a-state. Hitler was
the Fuhrer but Himmler ran the Reich with brutality.
Most people are familiar with the Allgemeine SS, Einsatzkommandos, the
elite Waffen SS, the SD, Gestapo, etc... but how many know of the SS
religious order Black Sun, the Archeological Branch, or the Technical
Branch?
The Technical Branch information is rare and Speer goes through many
of the projects and resources the SS were using at the close of the
war. I also believe that it is the only place you will find a Nazi
official actually comment on German disc aircraft. Speer says although
there was persistant talk of "flying tops" and that the SS requested
massive slave labor for the Kahla Complex where they were to be built,
Speer was not told what the SS were working on except that radical new
secret weapons would be produced there.
Speer goes into detail about the SS prefabrication methods, advanced
metallurgy, alternative fuels and engines, free energy machines (aka
Hans Coler's), electrical field weapons, a death ray (microwave
transmitter), and so on. Furthermore, he states that the SS
sub-contracted heavily so that by wars end very complex pieces to
advanced weapon systems and technology were discovered all over
Germany by the Allies, who had no idea what those pieces went to. The
final assembly areas of much of this tech were evacuated in 1945 and
the slave laborers killed to leave no trace.
Even though you might hate Speer, the book is worth the read for the
material it contains. No German Secret Weapons book from any time
period has any length devoted to the SS Technical Branch and herein
lies the mystery of a number of exotics, including all the occult Vril
and Thule discs as well as Rudolf Schriever's Flugkreisel,
Schauberger's Repulsin motors,etc...

Rob

[B2431]

>From: (robert arndt)

>Even though you might hate Speer, the book is worth the read for the
>material it contains.

>Rob
>
You missed my point entirely. I will simplify it for you. Speer's books are as
much fiction as they are fact. I will give you an example fom his book Inside
the Third Reich. He says by the time he made up his mind to introduce poisonous
gas to Hitler's bunker the vents had been built taller than he could reach. How
convient. It makes him look like he actually planned to kill Hitler.

Instead of worshiping Speer's "accomplishments" and "knowledge of projects" how
about recognizing he was a liar and a mass murderer whou was interested in
rewarming his legacy. Assuming Speer was correct about some projects and wonder
materials being designed please not that 63 years later most of these magicks
still haven't made an appearance. As for "opening up" the SS system Speer was
only repeating (or making up) some impractical, impossible (then and now) and
generally loony projects usually attributed to "German scientists" and claiming
the SS was doing it.

I have had my fill of Nazi "wonder weapons" and secrets still kept. Speer was
the only one in the Nazi hierarchy that attempted to organize a coherent arms
program, but he still was a butcher and a criminal. I say again all his books
were written to make himself look good so no one would deface his grave after
he went to Hell.

The U.S. , U.K., U.S.S.R., Japan and everyone else was working on fantastical
and strange projects that defy belief also.
Just like the Nazis most of the wackier ideas never got beyond the proposal
stage.

The Nazis didn't even heve the metals to make reliable jet engines.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[The Enlightenment]

Chad Irby > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> (The Enlightenment) wrote:
>
> > Chad Irby > wrote in message
> > >...
>
> > > Nope. Velocity is velocity, and coming in out of vacuum means those
> > > steel wings are just little flanges out in the Mach-20 airflow waiting
> > > to be melted - or broken off altogether.
> >
> > Nope. There is someting called a hypersonic L/D (lift to drag ratio).
>
> Yes, there is. And it tells us why those wings would have melted off.
> To get enough lift to bounce the Silverbird out of the atmosphere again,
> you have to deal with the drag of having it in the atmosphere for a few
> minutes. Certainly long enough and hot enough to melt those little
> steel wings, as demonstrated by the short X-15 flights with even tougher
> alloys at lower speeds.

The USAF and NASA engineers who did the Black Horse SSTO (Single Stage
to Orbit) designe study make the following claims:

http://www.risacher.org/bh/bh-faq.html

"Q: How will the Black Horse protect itself from melting when it
re-enters?

A:Reentry heating is a strong function of wing loading. The Space
Shuttle has a highly loaded wing, at over 120 lbs/ft2. The Black Horse
has a 20 lbs/ft2 wing loading. Some at Boeing believe it could be
possible to build an all metal aircraft (Applying Inconel, Rene 41,
etc.) since their in-house RASV design used all metal integrated
structure/tankage/TPS. (And handled cryogens, too!).
(Mitchell Burnside Clapp, ) "

More info here on Black Horse:
http://www.risacher.org/bh/analog.html

******************

The Germans didn't have alloys like inconel, rene 41 or the British
Nimonic series because these alloys have an 80% nickel content. (All
melt at about 1400C) but they had something close.

The Germans used alloys like Tinadur (Chrome,Nickel,Titanium 70% Iron)
and Cromadur (Chrome, Manganese, 70% Iron) for the turbine blades of
the Jumo 004B-4 Jet engine used on the Me 262. (Both types were were
used on the 004B-4 since insufficent production of either alone was
avaialble) The reason is that the Germans had a severe nickel
shortage. The problem was that without nickel creep strength falls of
after 600C more rapidly than the high nickel alloys even though
overall strength remains similar and the melting point is still around
1400C. (As a result the Germans had to x-ray and recycle their
turbine blades at 25 to 60 hours or about every 16 to 32 missions)

Cromadur is interesting in that is is weldable and maleable.
Cromadure blades were made by bending and welding along the trailing
edge.

Thus the Germans had alloys similar to inconel that melted at 1450C
and opperated at 750C as turbine blades. These were inferior in creep
strength but not melting point. I'd say their metalurgy were good
enough for Silverbird.

Sanger silver bird re-enters after a few skips at much less than the
17000mph of the all inconel Black Horse and Much less than even its
own 13000mph top speed becuase it has skipped to even less speed.

Remember that KE = 1/2mv^2 so by halving the rentry speed you 1/4 the
heat buildup.

Sangers work on re-entry was pioneering and very respectable. He did
Hypersonic wind tunnel testing. He had sueprsonic wing profiles and
he made use of ligtinn bodies. He build high impulse LOX/Kerosene
rocket engines that had the impulse needed to achieve the mission.















>
> > You can fly in and limit you rate of decent in a winged or lifting
> > body thus limiting peak heat to the extent that ablatives or even
> > tiles can be dispensed with.
>
> Up to a point, but you still have to deal with *extreme* temps, in the
> thousands of degrees range instead of hundreds, and boiler-type
> stainless is *not* going to do the job, especially in the thicknesses
> you need to use in spacecraft. The only way to get a decent lifetime
> out of the stuff at Mach 10 would be to make it prohibitively thick, and
> replace it after every flight.
>
> > > So the Silverbird could have managed about Mach 3 for a short period of
> > > time, about 1/5 of the *necessary* speed for suborbital missions like
> > > the one it was designed for... and then would have had to be scrapped
> > > due to overheating of the structure.
> >
> > It could have managed more than mach 3 easily.
>
> For a *very* short period of time, like the Mig-25. Then it would run
> out of fuel or melt. Sustained speeds at Mach 3 just aren't feasible
> with low-temp alloys.
>
> > The vehicle could have achieved sub orbital velocity at 13,000 mph.
>
> ...and melted in extremely short order.
>
> > Re-entered and slowed to a slower speed say 8,000 mph and skipped to
> > cool of and so on.
>
> As I've mentioned several times, not with the materials they had
> available in 1945. Repeating this false assumption does not make it
> suddenly become true.
>
> > > At a "mere" Mach 6, the X-15 skin reached 650 to 700 degrees C, in a
> > > minute and a half of powered flight. This would have happened to the
> > > Sanger several times per mission, with a skin that didn't have the heat
> > > resistance of the X-15's.
> >
> > Sanger is also higher up in thinner atmosphere.
>
> The X-15 hit Mach 6 and max temp at about the same altitude the Sanger
> was supposed to be at when it "skipped."
>
> > It skips up and down and was actualy to cruise at more like mach 10.
>
> And when it reentered the atmosphere, it would melt unless they
> redesigned it with better materials.
>
> > > ...you also left out the two or three Silverbirds that would have been
> > > lost due to the control problems inherent in supersonic flight. And
> > > then the one or two they would have lost due to the skin peeling off.
> > > And then one or two due to not knowing about how to support a man in
> > > space...
> >
> > The vehicle had an all moving tail.
>
> An all moving tail is nice, but it's not a prerequisite of super- and
> hypersonic flight, and it certainly would not have made the rest of the
> design workable.
>
> > Either way Sanger was using the first hypersonic wind tunnel in the
> > world to test his model.
>
> And I'm sure that foot-long model would have showed all of the issues
> I've mentioned. Oh, wait, it wouldn't. All it did was show how the air
> flowed around a solid machined model of the Silverbird.
>
> > > > No doubt other materials were in development. Eg double walled
> > > > skins, ablatives etc.
> > >
> > > Replace "were" with "would have to be once they started actually
> > > thinking about it."
> >
> > They were thinking about it.
>
> Not in any reference I've ever seen. Most of the books I've seen on the
> Silverbird are quite adamant that Sanger didn't spend much time on the
> bomber after the initial concept, and spent *no* time on heating issues,
> other than "it's going to cool off between skips." It was a concept
> with a tiny bit of research after the fact, but nothing like what you
> imagine it to be. Sanger spent a lot more time on his design for a
> ramjet-powered interceptor (which also never flew).
>
> > They apparently had a ceramics heat shield program (for Sanger at
> > least it appear) and more than one hypersonic wind tunnel working on
> > problems.
>
> Nope. They had *one* hypersonic tunnel in use in 1944, and it had a
> very short (~30 sec) operating period (vacuum-operated). The Sanger
> model was only tested for general ariflow, and they had *no* facilities
> at the time for extended hypersonic flow runs. There were plans to
> build a sustained hypersonic tunnel towards the end of the war, but the
> Germans never finished it.
>
> > Just about everying was anticipated, heat shielding included.
>
> Sanger spent no time studying the problem before the end of the war.
>
> > The biggest problem is heat shielding. Sanger had a hypersonic wind
> > tunnel to test hypersonic L/D. Controll surface effects, stability
> > and propably even heat build up issues could be tested.
>
> No, they couldn't. While small hypersonic tunnels are good for general
> airflow testing, they're lousy for extrapolating up to full-size
> machines.

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
(The Enlightenment) wrote:

> Chad Irby > wrote in message
> >...
> > In article >,
> > (The Enlightenment) wrote:
> >
> > > Chad Irby > wrote in message
> > > >...
> >
> > > > Nope. Velocity is velocity, and coming in out of vacuum means those
> > > > steel wings are just little flanges out in the Mach-20 airflow waiting
> > > > to be melted - or broken off altogether.
> > >
> > > Nope. There is someting called a hypersonic L/D (lift to drag ratio).
> >
> > Yes, there is. And it tells us why those wings would have melted off.
> > To get enough lift to bounce the Silverbird out of the atmosphere again,
> > you have to deal with the drag of having it in the atmosphere for a few
> > minutes. Certainly long enough and hot enough to melt those little
> > steel wings, as demonstrated by the short X-15 flights with even tougher
> > alloys at lower speeds.
>
> Thus the Germans had alloys similar to inconel that melted at 1450C
> and opperated at 750C as turbine blades. These were inferior in creep
> strength but not melting point.

So in other words, even if they used those alloys, the plane would have
come apart or deformed, or he would have had to build them out of much
thicker pieces of metal.

> I'd say their metalurgy were good enough for Silverbird.

Too bad they never got around to using it. Once again, the design for
the Silverbird had *nothing* in it about high-temp metals - just plain
old stainless steel, which you finally admit is not good enough, after
trying to claim that boiler-type stainless was good enough.

> Sangers work on re-entry was pioneering and very respectable.

He did almost *zero* work on re-entry. With the machinery he had
available, all he could do was very short tests on shockwave formation.

> He did Hypersonic wind tunnel testing.

....on tiny little models of the Silverbird, for less than 30 seconds at
a time, with *no* heat testing, and could not have done any different
with the equipment he had during the war.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[The Enlightenment]

Chad Irby > wrote in message >...
> In article >,
> (The Enlightenment) wrote:
>
> > Chad Irby > wrote in message
> > >...
> > > In article >,
> > > (The Enlightenment) wrote:
> > >
> > > > Chad Irby > wrote in message
> > > > >...
>
> > > > > Nope. Velocity is velocity, and coming in out of vacuum means those
> > > > > steel wings are just little flanges out in the Mach-20 airflow waiting
> > > > > to be melted - or broken off altogether.
> > > >
> > > > Nope. There is someting called a hypersonic L/D (lift to drag ratio).
> > >
> > > Yes, there is. And it tells us why those wings would have melted off.
> > > To get enough lift to bounce the Silverbird out of the atmosphere again,
> > > you have to deal with the drag of having it in the atmosphere for a few
> > > minutes. Certainly long enough and hot enough to melt those little
> > > steel wings, as demonstrated by the short X-15 flights with even tougher
> > > alloys at lower speeds.
> >
> > Thus the Germans had alloys similar to inconel that melted at 1450C
> > and opperated at 750C as turbine blades. These were inferior in creep
> > strength but not melting point.
>
> So in other words, even if they used those alloys, the plane would have
> come apart or deformed, or he would have had to build them out of much
> thicker pieces of metal.

No. You don't understand creep strength. The rate of creep is not
such that it should deform significanty and as I point out Sanger's
silver bird re-enetered at far less than orbital velocity.

All hypersonic aircraft, like the SR71 irrespective of material don't
have fatique problems becuase the heat effectively heat treates
(aneals) any work hardening metal. Titanium, inconel, austenitic
steels all are the same.


>
> > I'd say their metalurgy were good enough for Silverbird.
>
> Too bad they never got around to using it. Once again, the design for
> the Silverbird had *nothing* in it about high-temp metals - just plain
> old stainless steel, which you finally admit is not good enough, after
> trying to claim that boiler-type stainless was good enough.

Duh, Stainless steel IS a high temperatue alloy. The chromium
isolates the carbon (which can come out of solution) as chromium
carbide.

There were several German companies around at the time that could
produce high temperature refractory alloys and sold them commercialy.

The problem with the chromium steels was that their characteritics
fell of more rapidly than the nickel alloys over 600C. By the time we
get to around 1000C things are evening up again. At 1400C both are
melting.


>
> > Sangers work on re-entry was pioneering and very respectable.
>
> He did almost *zero* work on re-entry. With the machinery he had
> available, all he could do was very short tests on shockwave formation.
>
> > He did Hypersonic wind tunnel testing.
>
> ...on tiny little models of the Silverbird, for less than 30 seconds at
> a time, with *no* heat testing, and could not have done any different
> with the equipment he had during the war.

Thirty seconds (even 30 milliseconds) is plenty of time to get L/D
ratio data, stability data, center of pressure data and to use
Schlierian photography to image shock waves and to place a few
thermocouples in the model.

You assume NASA tested the shuttle near full scale at hypersonic
speeds.

Clearly the Silver bird concept allowed incremental testing and
development at progressively higher speeds. In many ways it was a
highly testable designe. Everything from sled acceleration, Sled
seperation, and rocket motor lightup at progressively higher speeds.

[Keith Willshaw]

"The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
om...

>
> All hypersonic aircraft, like the SR71 irrespective of material don't
> have fatique problems becuase the heat effectively heat treates
> (aneals) any work hardening metal. Titanium, inconel, austenitic
> steels all are the same.
>
>

Complete and utter cobblers

The normal stress relief temperature for titanium is around 1000 F
and the annealing temperature is closer to 1300 F

source:
Titanium Metals Corporation
Titanium Design and Fabrication Handbook for Industrial Applications

Keith

[The Enlightenment]

"Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
...
>
> "The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
> om...
>
> >
> > All hypersonic aircraft, like the SR71 irrespective of material
don't
> > have fatique problems becuase the heat effectively heat treates
> > (aneals) any work hardening metal. Titanium, inconel, austenitic
> > steels all are the same.
> >
> >
>
> Complete and utter cobblers

A statement that is complete hyperbole.


>
> The normal stress relief temperature for titanium is around 1000 F
> and the annealing temperature is closer to 1300 F
>
> source:
> Titanium Metals Corporation
> Titanium Design and Fabrication Handbook for Industrial Applications
>
> Keith
>
>

This web site recommends a 2 hour holding temperature as low as 500C
for stress relief heat treatment.
http://www.deutschetitan.de/eng/profi/kb6.html

The SR71 achieves a temperature of between 300C and 450C in localised
areas that Janes listed in 1974 while many web sites speak of 1100F as
the Blackbirds skin temperature. This is well withing the heat
treatment range though short of the full annealing I claimed.

The article I read regarding this effect seemed quite plausible and of
positive benefit.

[robert arndt]

> I have had my fill of Nazi "wonder weapons" and secrets still kept.

But the DoD, USAF, CIA, etc... have not. German weapon systems from
1945 are still classified and there is much evidence that links the
Third Reich's radical aircraft projects to US postwar projects
culminating in the black projects operating today. Therefore that
information is kept classified, restricted, compartmentalized.

> The U.S. , U.K., U.S.S.R., Japan and everyone else was working on fantastical
> and strange projects that defy belief also.
> Just like the Nazis most of the wackier ideas never got beyond the proposal
> stage.

True, but the US relationship with the UK allowed much of Allied
technology to be shared. Japan's advanced weapons programs were
negligible except for the question of the Japanese atomic bomb
program, which also remains a mystery. The U.S.S.R. OTOH was seen as
an enemy and there was considerable amount of spying done postwar to
learn what the Russians had captured from the Germans and what the
Germans were developing for them. History shows that Russia's military
and space programs benefitted nicely from German technology.
In regards to disc aircraft, the US percieved threat was real.
Everything from the Ghost Rockets of '46 forward was seen as an
attempt by the Russians to develop this type of craft. However, the
U.S.S.R. followed a strict quantity over quality development program
that set their aircraft industry back significantly. One can only look
at their X-planes of the time to see that the technical ability was
there but that Stalin and subsequent Soviet leaders prohibited
advanced, costly aircraft to be developed... no matter what threat
from the US emerged.
>
> The Nazis didn't even heve the metals to make reliable jet engines.

That's my point. The SS Technical Branch was in charge of developing
everything from synthetic fuels to advanced metallurgy to military
prefabrication methods to disc aircraft. The task was to invent and
develop a wide range of radical secret weapons that would stop the
daily bombardment of Germany and increase war production. The scary
thing is that they were making advances back then that rival
developments right now. The British for their part captured much of
the advanced SS components without the understanding of what the
technology was for or how it worked. Han's Coler's free energy machine
is a prime example. The British captured the documents and Coler built
a test machine for them. The machine did produce energy but the
British BIOS report of the experimentation says, "how it generates
energy is NOT known". Isn't that nice?
Same thing for the Thule Triebwereke except that this technology was
passed over to the US that conducted its own experiments and made
breakthroughs that eventually were moved from Wright Field, to
Edwards, to Area 51.

It is just amazing at the programs the SS were working on. Very few
people even know that the SS had a Technical Branch or of any of the
more advanced weapon systems. Speer's "Infiltration" opens the door to
that research and I have never found any other source that describes
these programs in detail. German secret weapons books first became
updated in the late 1970s. In the '80s and '90s the books became much
better due to Schiffer's German connection and the fact that the E.
German and Russian archives were opened. Further declassification of
some military documents and admission by the DoD and USAF over the
German discs has helped the picture to become much clearer. However,
the most sensitive documentation (which most likely includes photos,
timelines, and flight performances) remain heavily classified.

I'm just hoping that I live long enough for this material to see the
light of day again.

Rob
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Keith Willshaw]

"The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Keith Willshaw" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
> > om...
> >
> > >
> > > All hypersonic aircraft, like the SR71 irrespective of material
> don't
> > > have fatique problems becuase the heat effectively heat treates
> > > (aneals) any work hardening metal. Titanium, inconel, austenitic
> > > steels all are the same.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Complete and utter cobblers
>
> A statement that is complete hyperbole.
>

No one that comes from extensive expeience in welding and
fabricating titanium structures.

>
> >
> > The normal stress relief temperature for titanium is around 1000 F
> > and the annealing temperature is closer to 1300 F
> >
> > source:
> > Titanium Metals Corporation
> > Titanium Design and Fabrication Handbook for Industrial Applications
> >
> > Keith
> >
> >
>
> This web site recommends a 2 hour holding temperature as low as 500C
> for stress relief heat treatment.
> http://www.deutschetitan.de/eng/profi/kb6.html
>

Only for commercially pure titanium and that is the absolute bottom end of
the scale for stress relief only.

Your claim was that annealing occurs , the data table you provided
recommends a temperature of 700 Deg C ( for soft annealing of
CP Ti and 730 for commercial alloys. In other words around
1300 deg. F as I stated.

Even stress relief of usable alloys requires a minimum temperature
of 1000 F and that needs to be an EVEN distribution if thermal
stresses are not to be induced


> The SR71 achieves a temperature of between 300C and 450C in localised
> areas that Janes listed in 1974 while many web sites speak of 1100F as
> the Blackbirds skin temperature. This is well withing the heat
> treatment range though short of the full annealing I claimed.
>

Any article that claims SR-71 skin temperatures reach 1100 F is
less than believeable. NASA refer to max sustained temperatures
of around 600F on their aircraft

> The article I read regarding this effect seemed quite plausible and of
> positive benefit.
>

Given the differences in temperature between different parts of the
aircraft and the resultant thermal stresses this hardly seems like to
be a positive benefit, then there's the little matter of the scaling and
oxidation that occur at annealing temperatures unless one maintains
an inert atmosphere.

Keith

[Keith Willshaw]

"The Enlightenment" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> The SR71 achieves a temperature of between 300C and 450C in localised
> areas that Janes listed in 1974 while many web sites speak of 1100F as
> the Blackbirds skin temperature. This is well withing the heat
> treatment range though short of the full annealing I claimed.
>

Having bothered to look up the values in the company materials database
I find that the maximum permissible stress for Titanium alloys complying
with
ASTM-B3777-7 reaches zero at a temperature of 346 C. While this
is doubtless conservative it does graphically show the loss in structural
strength of the material at relatively low temperatures.

Even the most heat resistant of titanium alloys such as 6l-4V is only good
for around 800 deg F (430 C) and at that point its
load bearing properties are gravely compromised with a
maximum life expectancy of 1000 hrs requiring a stress
level of no more than 25% of that available at room temperature.

In short were the airframe hot enough for annealing to occur
it would fall apart under the stresses of supersonic flight.

Keith

[Chad Irby]

In article >,
(The Enlightenment) wrote:

> No. You don't understand creep strength. The rate of creep is not
> such that it should deform significanty and as I point out Sanger's
> silver bird re-enetered at far less than orbital velocity.

I understand it quite well, thank you, the problem is that you're
severely underestimating both the heat and stress on the Silverbird (as
I've pointed out about a half-dozen times so far).

> All hypersonic aircraft, like the SR71 irrespective of material don't
> have fatique problems becuase the heat effectively heat treates
> (aneals) any work hardening metal. Titanium, inconel, austenitic
> steels all are the same.

The problem isn't long term fatigue, it's short term falling apart
because it gets really bloody hot in a very short period of time. The
high wing loading of the Silverbird would just make things worse, and
comparing it to an SR-71 (made out of tougher alloys) that flew about
1/4 the speed is just sad.

> Duh, Stainless steel IS a high temperatue alloy.

The one you quoted as your first example (boiler-type stainless) is
*not*, in this case high-temp enough, by about 600 or 700 degrees.

> There were several German companies around at the time that could
> produce high temperature refractory alloys and sold them commercialy.

....and that might have been enough, if the plans had called for
high-temp alloys. They did not, as you've been ignoring. PLain old
stainless.

> > > He did Hypersonic wind tunnel testing.
> >
> > ...on tiny little models of the Silverbird, for less than 30 seconds at
> > a time, with *no* heat testing, and could not have done any different
> > with the equipment he had during the war.
>
> Thirty seconds (even 30 milliseconds) is plenty of time to get L/D
> ratio data, stability data, center of pressure data and to use
> Schlierian photography to image shock waves and to place a few
> thermocouples in the model.

Except that, as photographs of the models have shown (readily available
on the net and in books), there was no place *on* the model to place
thermocouples. They did *not*, again, do this. You can keep hoping
they did, but it's just plain not so. They got the gross aerodynamic
data, but not the sort of detailed stuff they'd need for a successful
program.

> You assume NASA tested the shuttle near full scale at hypersonic
> speeds.

No, but they tested smaller scale models at hypersonic speeds in all of
the ways that Sanger did *not*, and they had a couple of decades of
practical experimental data (X-15, SR-71, Apollo) on high-speed flight
and reentry.

> Clearly the Silver bird concept allowed incremental testing and
> development at progressively higher speeds. In many ways it was a
> highly testable designe. Everything from sled acceleration, Sled
> seperation, and rocket motor lightup at progressively higher speeds.

....and given a decade or so, Sanger might have had a chance to fill in
all of the blanks he didn't do in his first attempt. The Silverbird
was, again, a nifty idea with very little engineering data behind it,
like so many of the German "superweapons" that were never built.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

[The Enlightenment]

(robert arndt) wrote in message >...
> > As I've mentioned several times, not with the materials they had
> > available in 1945. Repeating this false assumption does not make it
> > suddenly become true.
> >
> > > > At a "mere" Mach 6, the X-15 skin reached 650 to 700 degrees C, in a
> > > > minute and a half of powered flight. This would have happened to the
> > > > Sanger several times per mission, with a skin that didn't have the heat
> > > > resistance of the X-15's.
>
> You obviously don't know much about the SS Technical Branch and their
> work in metallurgy. Documents recovered at Gottingen and Volkenrode
> indicate that between 1943-44 the SS were experimenting with a
> frictionless metal called "Luftschwamm" (Aerosponge) that could
> withstand 1000 degrees Centigrade.

This is no bizzare idea.

I first came across foamed metal while working in Germany in 1992. It
was foamed aluminium used in this case to absorb the energy of car
crash.

Very complicated foams of Aluuminium, Titanium, Nickel and refractory
alloys are possible as sheets or moldings with smooth finishes.
Foaming can be by inert gas but more likely by foaming agents like TiH
or ZiH.

They can be injection molded or formed into sheets. All sorts of
connection methods are possible including welding.

There is a review of the technolgy here:
http://nic.sav.sk/ummsjk/main_act.htm

They are at the point where Volvo are using Stainless steel laminates
with metal foam/fiber center cores for use in production cars.

Consider that aircraft skins in WW2 were reaching 5mm thick (B29
bomber)

As a thought experiment immagine a stainless steel laminate consisting
of 0.25mm stainless steel on either side with a 4:1 foamed core. I
would have the same thickness as the aluminium and the same density
but would have much higher stiffnes and strength and would provide
usable strength up to 750C to 1000C for refractory allys. I foaming
of Molydenum becomes possible perhaps 2000C.

The Tinadur alloy Junkers used on the Jumo 004B series Jet was of
Ti,Ni,Cr,Fe and would have leant itself nicely to foaming with TiH.

The heat isolating poperties would be substantial. At least 20 times
that of the equivalent weight of steel.

I imagine that a SSTO, (Single Stage to Orbit) vehicle could be made
in foamed metal in which the structure serves to:
1 Provides Integral Heat Isolating Tankage for Cryogenic Propellants.
(I.E. no
2 Provides Heat Shielding.
3 Provides Strength, Stiffness with a minium of internal structure.

[B2431]

>Compared to V-22 Osprey
>From: (robert arndt)
>Date: 12/1/2003 8:26 AM Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>> I have had my fill of Nazi "wonder weapons" and secrets still kept.
>
>But the DoD, USAF, CIA, etc... have not. German weapon systems from
>1945 are still classified and there is much evidence that links the
>Third Reich's radical aircraft projects to US postwar projects
>culminating in the black projects operating today. Therefore that
>information is kept classified, restricted, compartmentalized.
>
None of which you can prove.

>> Just like the Nazis most of the wackier ideas never got beyond the proposal
>> stage.
>
>True, but the US relationship with the UK allowed much of Allied
>technology to be shared. Japan's advanced weapons programs were
>negligible except for the question of the Japanese atomic bomb
>program, which also remains a mystery. The U.S.S.R. OTOH was seen as
>an enemy and there was considerable amount of spying done postwar to
>learn what the Russians had captured from the Germans and what the
>Germans were developing for them. History shows that Russia's military
>and space programs benefitted nicely from German technology.
>In regards to disc aircraft, the US percieved threat was real.
>Everything from the Ghost Rockets of '46 forward was seen as an
>attempt by the Russians to develop this type of craft. However, the
>U.S.S.R. followed a strict quantity over quality development program
>that set their aircraft industry back significantly. One can only look
>at their X-planes of the time to see that the technical ability was
>there but that Stalin and subsequent Soviet leaders prohibited
>advanced, costly aircraft to be developed... no matter what threat
>from the US emerged.
>>
<snip>

>Same thing for the Thule Triebwereke except that this technology was
>passed over to the US that conducted its own experiments and made
>breakthroughs that eventually were moved from Wright Field, to
>Edwards, to Area 51.

Why, of COURSE they did, how convienient.

<snip more blind idolization of the Super Swine>

>the most sensitive documentation (which most likely includes photos,
>timelines, and flight performances) remain heavily classified.

And you alone know all about this?

>I'm just hoping that I live long enough for this material to see the light of
day again.
>
>Rob

Ah yes, the Fourth Reich and you will be yelling "seig heil" louder than the
next guy?

I am not saying there was no Nazi tecnology more advanced than the Allies, but
the SS never produced any super weapons other than the V-2. And that was
designed by an non SS Nazi team. BTW, von Braun didn't invent the liquid fuel
rocket engine or rocket flight. Darn the luck, if your beloved SS had predated
Goddard maybe they would have.

While you are drooling over the SS and their pretty uniforms ask yourself how
many human beings were killed in their experiments and slave labour camps. Then
compare the human suffering vs actual product.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[robert arndt]

(B2431) wrote in message >...
> >Compared to V-22 Osprey
> >From: (robert arndt)
> >Date: 12/1/2003 8:26 AM Central Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >> I have had my fill of Nazi "wonder weapons" and secrets still kept.
> >
> >But the DoD, USAF, CIA, etc... have not. German weapon systems from
> >1945 are still classified and there is much evidence that links the
> >Third Reich's radical aircraft projects to US postwar projects
> >culminating in the black projects operating today. Therefore that
> >information is kept classified, restricted, compartmentalized.
> >
> None of which you can prove.

Where do you think Jim Wilson of "Popular Mechanics" got his
information from? He obtained both USAF and DoD documents through the
Freedom of Information Act and only after there was a congressional
mandate to declassify some of the older records. The German disc
aircraft and the German engineers that worked on them are firmly
placed here in the US working on similar projects in 1946. You can't
dispute that at all, its documented. The USAF admitted these designs
in the late 1990s but did not furnish any photos, timelines, flight
footage, or the disposition of the aircraft after experimenting with
them and/or replicating them. Doesn't that bother you at all? Why
admit these things and not release ALL of the documentation on them?
Why restrict the rest of the material until 2020- the LONGEST time
period they can legally classify that material?
>
> >> Just like the Nazis most of the wackier ideas never got beyond the proposal
> >> stage.
> >
> >True, but the US relationship with the UK allowed much of Allied
> >technology to be shared. Japan's advanced weapons programs were
> >negligible except for the question of the Japanese atomic bomb
> >program, which also remains a mystery. The U.S.S.R. OTOH was seen as
> >an enemy and there was considerable amount of spying done postwar to
> >learn what the Russians had captured from the Germans and what the
> >Germans were developing for them. History shows that Russia's military
> >and space programs benefitted nicely from German technology.
> >In regards to disc aircraft, the US percieved threat was real.
> >Everything from the Ghost Rockets of '46 forward was seen as an
> >attempt by the Russians to develop this type of craft. However, the
> >U.S.S.R. followed a strict quantity over quality development program
> >that set their aircraft industry back significantly. One can only look
> >at their X-planes of the time to see that the technical ability was
> >there but that Stalin and subsequent Soviet leaders prohibited
> >advanced, costly aircraft to be developed... no matter what threat
> >from the US emerged.
> >>
> <snip>

You snip because you have nothing to say about the strange phenomenon
that started in the Baltic (Soviet occupied Peenemunde) in 1946
followed by all the subsequent disc activity that started up the
summer of '47 and which has never abated. It is obvious from what
documents we have and the knowledge of the AVRO disc programs that the
US, UK, and Canada all had disc programs immediately after the war and
that the US suspected the Soviets of the same technology. Yet you have
nothing to say and disregard everyone's programs as fantasy... even
though we now know about Silverbug, Northrop NS-97, the nuclear LRV,
etc...
what's the matter with you? Can't face reality?
>
> >Same thing for the Thule Triebwerke except that this technology was
> >passed over to the US that conducted its own experiments and made
> >breakthroughs that eventually were moved from Wright Field, to
> >Edwards, to Area 51.
>
> Why, of COURSE they did, how convienient.

So the Triebwerke's Coler Konverter/Shumann Levitator/heated spinning
mercury sphere operation is far-fetched? The TR-3b ASTRA black
triangle uses a similar approach. It uses a nuclear source instead of
Coler's free energy machine (which was connected to a generator). In
place of the Schumann Levitators it uses three advanced manouvering
rockets. And, like the Triebwerke, utilizes heated spinning mercury to
affect gravity... only the TR-3b uses an accelerator ring to
accomplish that.
If you read the ancient Indian texts of their Vimana flying craft you
will read that it too used mercury to fly. Same concept over thousands
of years. Not impossible just not understood very well.
>
> <snip more blind idolization of the Super Swine>

No idolization here just commenting on the SS Technical Branch
programs.
>
> >the most sensitive documentation (which most likely includes photos,
> >timelines, and flight performances) remain heavily classified.
>
> And you alone know all about this?

A lot of people know about this and have tried in vain through the
Freedom of Information Act to force the Govt. to explain what strange
aerial phenomenon we have been experiencing since 1946. A big part of
that is covert military aircraft, the exotics originating from Nazi
Germany. You hate to hear that but it is the truth. Funny how you
accept German engineering in missile tech, jet and rocket aircraft,
and space tech... but not with more advanced projects.
>
> >I'm just hoping that I live long enough for this material to see the light of
> day again.
> >
> >Rob
>
> Ah yes, the Fourth Reich and you will be yelling "seig heil" louder than the
> next guy?

Hardly since being a historical realist and aviation fan does not make
me a fascist.
>
> I am not saying there was no Nazi tecnology more advanced than the Allies, but
> the SS never produced any super weapons other than the V-2. And that was
> designed by an non SS Nazi team. BTW, von Braun didn't invent the liquid fuel
> rocket engine or rocket flight. Darn the luck, if your beloved SS had predated
> Goddard maybe they would have.

I never stated otherwise. The SS Technical Branch was TASKED with
improving existing technology AND inventing new technology that would
stop the daily bombing of Germany. Since that affected transportation
too the SS were developing alternative fuels and power generators. The
SS did invent generators that ran off coal and grain alcohol and used
them in their facilities. I'm sure you've seen photos of the coal
engined Kubelwagen and powered searchlights. Other areas were
prefabrication methods, production dispersal, etc... also employed in
late '44-45. But secret weapons were also their mission. They started
early in the war by taking over the German Army's dangerous N-material
production and storage (which has only recently been identified as
CF3). This material was too dangerous to handle in combat and store so
it was destroyed. The SS was also heavily involved in gas research and
sadly tested out new agents on slave laborers from the camps. One gas
captured by the US Third Army was an experimental brown crystalline
desiccator designed to completely dehydrate a person alive. After the
July 1944 bomb plot, the SS was given control over the V-weapons
program and all jet projects. The confusion over the disc aircraft
arises from the fact that those programs predate 1944 and are not in
any connected with the RLM. Himmler was a Thule member and the SS
Technical Branch worked with both the Thule and Vril Societies in
creating occult disc machines based on information obtained by the
mediums Maria Orsitsch and Sigrun through channeling. At Himmler's
castle occult practices took place by the SS Black Sun- their
religious Order that held beliefs exactly the same as the Thule and
Vril Societies. Himmler, therefore, had a fascination with these
occult machines and their mysterious power source. A special
development unit E-4 was created within the Technical Branch to
specifically develop the discs. The work of Coler, Schumann,
Schauberger, and others from Thule and Vril were utilized by the SS
(along with the millions of patents stolen from the occupied
countries) to create these machines.
I know you just want a clear, non-occult picture of these machines but
you cannot seperate the occult from the Third Reich. The NSDAP itself
came from the Thule Society and the Nazi leadership were Thule
members. The NSDAP produced Hitler and Hitler the SS in all its forms.
You keep mentioning the general SS. There was also the Waffen SS, SD,
the Black Sun Order, the DHvSS, the Archeological Branch, and
Technical Branch.
Speer's book attempts to penetrate the entire SS and that is all I
pointed out.
>
> While you are drooling over the SS and their pretty uniforms ask yourself how
> many human beings were killed in their experiments and slave labour camps. Then
> compare the human suffering vs actual product.

Not necessary at all. Totally uncalled for. It would be great if the
SS weren't involved at all. If Heinkel, Messerschmitt, or Focke Wulf
were tasked with disc development this entire subject wouldn't be
controversial at all.
>
> Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

Rob