Talk:V-2 rocket

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Echo has identified V-2 rocket as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Japanese language Wikipedia.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the V-2 rocket article.
Please sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). New discussion topics go at the bottom of the page; click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Frequently asked questions. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Talk page guidelines Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Don't bite the newcomers!

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Related task forces... British military history task force German military history task force Maritime warfare task force Polish military history task force Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force World War II task force

Contents 1 Tech description lacking 2 Production numbers and launched numbers in general 3 US launchers 4 Major UK rocketry? 5 Missile tests down 'under 6 V-2s in Canada? 7 Jupiter-C 8 Entering space 9 POW slaves 10 V-2 in relation to V1 11 V-2 test launche picture, falls? 12 Alternative pictures 13 Manned and winged variants 14 Operator 15 Allied defenses against V2 16 V2 engine in London Space museum 17 Roman Träger 18 Cold Weather 19 New diagram 20 Wrong Gyroscope Photo 21 Wrong name of the Rocket 22 Missung the A-Series rockets 23 Unclear inf. 24 Picture caption

[edit] Tech description lacking

It lacks a technical description to be complete.

Currently the technical description is good. I merged two (!) 'technical detail' sections and added several extra details. The first technical detail section was sub-par and I moved the second technical detail section up to it's place. It could use more detail on the navigation controls (which were extremely advanced at that time) and it's self-ignition and turbo-pump system.Crusty007

[edit] Production numbers and launched numbers in general

More effort should be placed in accurately describing the produced and launched numbers. For one, I cannot find a number of 6000 outside the internet. In books the number is more like 4000. Also, the number of launched missiles is based on what came down at the other end. By the developers and engineers own reporting, At least 650 V-2's are known to be destroyed in mid-flight, most likely due to general defects and more specifically overheating of the nose cone section. Also, I think there were also some fired against the Dutch port of Rotterdam Crusty007

[edit] US launchers

All the US launcher are more or less descendant of the V-2. The jupiter-c is not a modified v-2 if you want to see what it looks like see http://www.fas.org/spp/guide/usa/launch/jupiter-c.htm Ericd

The Redstone rocket is a direct improvement on the A4/V-2, and was built by the same people who built the A4/V-2. The Russian next step was almost completely an indigineous development. Crusty007

[edit] Major UK rocketry?

"The UK did not set up a major rocketry program after the war." Huh? Tannin

I don't a lot of things about it but they are parts of British launchers at the Science Museum in London and one stage of the Europa rocket was British. Ericd 22:36 Jan 26, 2003 (UTC)

British Rocket programs, just a google away http://members.aol.com/nicholashl/ukspace/rocketry.htm. Mintguy

Hihi we found the same reference, you were kicker than me.

Ericd

Maury - England and UK are not the same thing. Thanks. Mintguy

[edit] Missile tests down 'under

I have way too many projects going here at the same time, but I'm sure you guys will take care of it. :) The reason I was so surprised is that when I was at school in the 1960s, it was quite common to hear on the news that there was another missle test at Woomera today. Tannin

[edit] V-2s in Canada?

V-2 revival ? Look at this http://www.canadianarrow.com/. Ericd

[edit] Jupiter-C

"Jupiter-C, a direct descendant of the German A-4 (V-2) rocket..." is what the page says. It was also designed by the designer of the V-2...was it not a modified version? Chadloder 04:36 Jan 27, 2003 (UTC)

No the page doesn't say it was a modified version and the pictures show~s it wasn't a modified version.

The V-2 is a A-4 one stage of the Jupiter is a A-7 A-4 5 6 7, four generations

this is more than a modified version.

Ericd

[edit] Entering space

"when the rocket followed it's trajectory perfectly and landed 120 miles away, and became the first man-made object to enter space. " Did the V-2 really enter space or only high athmosphere ?

Ericd 15:50 Mar 2, 2003 (UTC)

The top altitude of the rocket was 80 km (50 mi). That is the thermosphere strictly speaking, but I don't know if there is a strict definition of what we mean by "space", some would probably say this is indeed space. --Nixdorf

The current definition of space, and the one that the X-prize was calling for, was 60 km altitude. Above that and you're in space, officially. However, the Germans also tested the A4 in non-trajectory tests, straight-up, straight-down. Because official records after 1943 were destroyed not a lot of details remain, but it is recorded by Dieter Huzel in his book Peenemunde to Canaveral, that one of these tests reached an altitude of 1874 kilometers. (Dutch 1965 translation, page 104-105). I have no reason to doubt the written record of one of the chief engineers on the project. Most likely it would be a test without a payload, as it's highly unlikely the A4 could reach that height under full operational weight.Crusty007

Not 60 km but 100 km see Boundary to space--Clawed 10:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Agree. Furthermore, according to Astronautix.com, on October 3, 1942 the rocket reached only 48 km altitude, not 80 km [1] Cmapm 18:25, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POW slaves

"These slaves were mostly prisoners of war but many were French and Soviet." May somebody be so kind and explain this nonsense sentence?? Thank you!

In answer to 80.133.114.116's question above, the German site [2] states Sehr viele Häftlinge, in der Mehrzahl Russen, Polen und Franzosen, überlebten die schweren Monate des Stollenausbaus nicht., so a better sentence would be: "The majority of the prisoners of war were Russian, Polish and French." However, the whole paragraph could be better:

V-2 mass production was conducted at the Mittelwerk tunnel system under the Kohnstein mountain, part of the Mittelbau-Dora slave labour camp complex, near Nordhausen, Germany. By late 1943 over 10,500 slaves were in Kohnstein and many died due to the conditions and heavy labour. For example, 2,900 died between October 1943 and March 1944, but others died during transfers and other work. The majority of the slaves were Russian, Polish and French, although there were also prisoners of war and Germans forced to compulsory work.

But this looks like it belongs more in the Mittelbau-Dora article, and that looks like a lot of work. It's complicated because the complex was used for several purposes and prisoners were rotated through the various subcamps. -Wikibob | Talk 12:17, 2004 Apr 3 (UTC)

[edit] V-2 in relation to V1

I assume the name V-2 is because it was a replacement for the V-1? Perhaps that should be mentioned in the article, both because it seems a relevant piece of information and for historical context. I expect one of you lot will know better than me what the key information is. Harry R 23:31, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

The V-2 was absolutely not a replacement for the V-1, these were complementary and totally different weapons developed by two different organizations but in the same geographical area. The numbers of the weapons were given, as you can read in the article, by the propaganda department and has little to do with any research order. Nixdorf 22:08, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

To put this into perspective, the V-1 was made partly of plywood and had an extremely simple engine that would essential fart a couple of dozen times a second. It would be launched from a simple ramp using solid rocket boosters. It's engine can be built by anyone in the world with even the simplest engineering degree. This engine also gave the V-1 it's nickname, because of the distinctive sound it made. Internal navigation consisted of a timer which would shutdown the engine at a predetermined time, hopefully somewhere over England. In contrast, the A4/V-2 was an extremely big,liquid fuel rocket, with an internal navigation system consisting of gyroscopes which basically had to be invented for the thing, a fuel pump and injection system which had to be invented for the thing, a ignition system which had never been done before, supercooled cryogenic fuels , hypergolic fuels, radio-guidance controls, high-temperature graphite rudder controls, the biggest combustion chamber in existence, etc etc. The difference is immense.Crusty007

[edit] V-2 test launche picture, falls?

Hello I have a comment about the about the 3 picture in this article. In the comment under the picture we can read that it is a "US test Launch" I think that is not the holl story.

In the picture you can cleary see that that the V-2 as has 2 stages. The first stage is, of course the V-2 itself. No doubt about it. But on top of the V-2 you can see a much smaller rocket that is stickt to the rocket.

If my information is correct that should be a "Wac Coporal" rocket. The Wac Coporal was a small rocket that was in at test by the USA during WW II. The "Wac Coporal" was constructed at the same place as where the captured V-2. I think Von Braun wanted to test the idea of a "2 stage" rocket by putting the much smaller "Wac Coporal" on top of the much bigger V-2.

What do you think about the idea ?

At second thought this should be a two stage Bumper-WAC rocket (V2 + WAC Corporal). The small WAC Corporal was I think the only experimental US rocket at the end of WW2. I din't notice when I found the photo I mainly was impressed by it's graphic quality. The NASA referenced this photo as a V-2 test launch. See : http://www.solarviews.com/eng/rocket.htm http://www.spaceline.org/rocketsum/bumper-wac.html Ericd 19:44, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Alternative pictures

There is an alternative picture of V2 rocket air & space museum
[[Image:V2_rocket_at_Air_and_Space_museum.jpg|right|thumb||206px|V2 rocket on display at the [[National Air and Space Museum]] in Washington D.C.]]

Re picture of the "falling V-2s warning" leaflet near Blizna, Poland - given the ultrasecret nature of the project, no mention of ballistic rocket would be made to lay public at all, I am pretty sure. The leaflet apparently appeared in the areas where fighters would drop the exhausted or even full tanks during encounters with Allied aircraft (around industrial centres etc.). It was meant to avoid false alarms and call the bomb disposal teams, badly needed elsewhere, to handle the virtually harmless (just some residual petrol inside) jettisoned drop tanks. The tanks themselves usually carried a bold inscription Keine Bombe ("Not a bomb" in German).

[edit] Manned and winged variants

There were some manned and winged variants of the V2 proposed. Not sure if it should be put in here except as a link, but might be an article idea for creation. Any thoughts? Also, what would be a good name for a seperate article about them? - Chairboy 18:24, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

These were not V2 rockets but drafts on totally new devices by Wernher von Braun and colleagues. They were given experimental names in the "A" series (remember V2 was just a propaganda name for the A4 rocket). The names would be linked to something like A9 rocket, A9/A10 rocket and A9/A10/A11/A12 rocket if you want articles like that, see this link Nixdorf 16:24, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

I have books that described some of the variants as actually being very close to the V2. For example, the A4b was a winged variant of the V2 that would extend the range by gliding. See this for more info. - Chairboy 16:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Actually there is now the article named Aggregate series. Nixdorf 17:28, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

Re picture of the falling V-2s warning leaflet near Blizna, Poland - given the ultrasecret nature of the project, no mention of ballistic rocket would be made to lay public at all, I am pretty sure. The leaflet apparently appeared in the areas where fighters would drop the exhausted or even full tanks during encounters with Allied aircraft (around industrial centres etc.). It was meant to avoid false alarms and call the badly needed bomb disposal teams to handle the virtually harmless (just some residual petrol inside) jettisoned drop tanks. The tanks themselves usually carried a bold inscription Keine Bombe ("Not a bomb" in German).

[edit] Operator

Just wondering if anybody knows what branch of the German military operated them. Was the Luftwaffe, army, SS or some other unit in charge of them. I would guess luftwaffe, but am not sure and didn't see it in a quick scan of the article.

The Wehrmacht (Army) was in charge of Germany's rocketry program. Quicksilver 20:35, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

...and the Luftwaffe in charge of V-1 radek

Actually, the German Army is Heer. Wehrmacht was the defense force that consisted of the Heer, the Kriegsmarine and the Luftwaffe– this would have been equivalent to the US Department of War at the time.. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 02:37, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Allied defenses against V2

From everything I read there were none. Unlike the V-1, for which the British used balloon barriers and the like they never developed any kind of defenses against the V-2. The most they could do is feed the Germans faulty intelligence as to where the rockets were hitting. Hence I think the sentence "Analysis of the captured equipment proved vital in improving the Allies anti-V-2 defenses." should be removed. radek

Good point. I checked a site or two and confirmed it - added a relevant new link to the article. So I've removed it, as you advocated, and taken the opportunity to add other relevant detail and subedit a bit. Oh! the power! Hope no one's offended. Folks at 137 21:48, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] V2 engine in London Space museum

As far as I remember there's a V-2 engine and a complete V-2 on display at the Science Museum. Or is it only one in two parts ? Ericd 22:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Roman Träger

This is a small point in reference to the photo of Roman Träger and the caption. I don't think he was a scientist, rather he was an Austrian anti-Nazi serving as an officer in the Wermacht on Pennemunde who provided AK with intel.radek 06:00, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

No small point, rather quite a significant one, I'd say! To help with updating the article, would you be able to translate the passage about Träger on the following web page: Archidiecezja Gnieźnieńska: Dzięki nim II wojna światowa trwała krócej... (the bottom paragraph)? If you can find an opportunity to do this, please supply the translation here on the talk page. --Wernher 13:21, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Here it is, quick and dirty:

Thanks to them, WW2 ended earlier...

On the wall of house no. 10 near the Cotton Market in Bydgoszcz a plaque was placed and blessed, in memory of Augustyn and Roman Trager. The intelligence work carried out by the father and son contributed to the Allied decision to bomb Peenemunde on the Baltic island of Uznam in 1943, where there was a German production and testing site of V-1 and V-2 rockets [sic] –- weapons which were supposed to change the course of the war. [...]

These plaques help to save the memories of heroic deeds. For a long time the official history of the People’s Republic of Poland never mentioned the contributions of the Tragers which led to delay of development of V-1 and V-2. Only at the start of the 70’s was this detail of one of the greatest feats of Polish intelligence during the WW2 examined. [...]

Augustyn Sek-Trager was from a mixed family. His father was an Austrian and his mother was Polish. Under the influence of his mother Augustyn devoted himself to the cause of Poland, torn apart by the partitions. (During WW1) He first served in the Austrian army, later joined Pilsudskis’ legions. Even back then he worked in the intelligence section.

In 1934 Augustyn moved into the house no. 10 near the Cotton Market in Bydgoszcz. Roman Trager during his stay at Peenemunde realized that the Germans had constructed a testing site for the V-1 and V-2 rockets on Uznam. In 1943, at a family Christmas Eve dinner he gave his father a hand drawn sketch of the military base, with the production sites marked. This report went to London. On the night of 17-18 of August 1943, RAF carried out a raid on Peenemunde – the Nazi laboratory of the ‘wunderwaffen’ ceased to exist.

Augustyn Trager died in 1957. His son, Roman in 1987. Only in an independent Poland did they get the recognition they deserved. Another ‘white hole’ in history was replaced by the truth, written on a plaque."

It's from a Radio Audition and sort of heavy on Pathos. Also doesn't say that Roman was a Wermacht officer. I read about the Traeger's in Michal Wojewodzki's 'Akcja V-1, V-2' (Action V-1, V-2). I'm pretty sure Roman was an NCO in the Wermacht, not a scientist. Augustyn, the father might have been. I don't have the book with me right now so I can't double check though. radek 02:42, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the translation! My Polish is a bit rusty, you see... *Cough* :-) I took the liberty of readability-fixing the thing. If you or any others (Poles) feel like it, I guess a cursory article* on the Trägers could be made by rewriting the above in a more sober tone, and perhaps with some further info from the book you mention. We should probably get hold of definite information on the NCO/Wehrmacht issue before changing this article, though. --Wernher 10:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

(* suggested name of article: Roman Träger; redirect also from Augustyn Träger, August Träger, Augustyn Sek-Träger, August Sek-Träger, and the corresponding Trager and Traeger variants for both men's names...)

Well, I took out the 'scientist' part as I'm pretty sure that's inaccurate (possibly it's confusing him with Antoni Kocjan). I've been wanting to do an article on the Tragers but the books with the relevant info are at my parents house far away, so it'd be from memory. Other than that it'll just have to wait.radek 08:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cold Weather

How did the Germans successfully launch rockets in a cold city such as Peenemünde (refer to the Challenger to see how cold weather affects rockets)? Captain Jackson 17:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New diagram

I create a new diagram of the V-2 and tried to more accurately represent the engine parts than the original one (which did not look anything like a V-2 engine), which is at Image:V-2 rocket diagram (with English labels).svg. Any suggestions about other ways to improve the diagram would be much appreciated, as I will be created a version with numbers for labels and a version without labels for other use, but only after I have finalized the English language one. If you have any comments about it, please feel free to leave them here or on my talk page. --Fastfission 23:08, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wrong Gyroscope Photo

The photo of the "V-2 Gyroscope" in this article is actually an SG-66, an experimental device that was never flown in a V-2. The actual V-2 gyroscope was the LEV-3, which was a completely different device, not a stabilized platform at all, just a pair of gyros and an accelerometer fixed to the frame of the rocket. DonPMitchell 01:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wrong name of the Rocket

The correct name of the V2 is A4 = Aggregat Vier (aggregate four). V2 was the the Propaganda name.

[edit] Missung the A-Series rockets

like A1,A2,A3,A4b,A5,A7,A4+Wac-Copporal and the planes of the Space Rockets A9 and A10. Please look here on this page. http://www.bernd-leitenberger.de/a4-2.shtml http://www.bernd-leitenberger.de/img/a-entwicklung.jpeg

[edit] Unclear inf.

The lead says: "The V2 rocket became the first man-made object launched into space during test flights that reached an altitude of 189 km (620,000 ft)" But when was this achieved actually? Verifiable reference to a reliable source would be ideal. Cmapm 15:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

It is referenced - right there in the lead. To a book written by the military commander of rocket research station at Peenemunde, present at the launch, even. Also from our List of V-2 test launches: "V-4 October 3, 1942 58 190 P-VII Too steep, success (First rocket to reach outer space)" Rmhermen 17:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Are you sure the date is provided in that reference? If yes, then can you provide respective exact citation from there on this talk page? Astronautix.com says on October 3 it reached 48 km altitude [3]. As for 189 km launch Astronautix.com suggests it could take place somewhere in 1944 [4]:

"Beginning of 1944. However during the war there were some vertical shots of the missile to test its stability and behaviour in a vacuum. On one such shot the missile reached 189 km altitude"

Cmapm 17:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes I think 1944 is correct. However, you should have changed it to that instead of removing all mention of it. This immediately raises flags of historical revisionism. Rmhermen 19:25, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Picture caption

The "Frau im Mond" reference on the first picture seems like it should belong in a later trivia section instead. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.71.35.143 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

Frau im Mond was an influence on many of the V-2 designers, thus this isn't really trivial. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 01:11, 4 December 2006 (UTC)