Thanks to all of you who comment and provide feedback - it's important to us and helps shape the channel. But as Gordon Cooper may have said: funding makes this bird go up! So we have recently started SuperThanks, and our sincere thanks go to Blake and gshort47087 for directly supporting our work. All funding support is most welcome, but your comments are important too, so please keep them coming! Thanks for watching. Kind regards Robert J Dalby
A friend was an engineer at Glenn L Martin in the 1950s. He worked on the other cousin of the V-2 the Viking. One of his jobs was to measure the deflection of the structure that supported the engine, the deflection had to be figured into the controls of the rocket. They planned to load the rocket with hydraulic jacks and measure the deflection with dial indicators. My friend was told to just stick his head into the bottom of the rocket and read the dial indicators. He politely refused and suggested that they could cut some holes in the skirt without affecting anythng. Good thing they did because one afternoon during a test the whole assembly squashed into a heap of junk.
Hi there, and thanks for posting. The US aerospace industry of the 1950s was a bit more gung-ho and a lot less fearful of injury litigation! If you haven't already done so, please don't forget to subscribe - it helps us more than you might think and ensures you won't miss our next upload on the A4/V2 missile. KR RJD A&NTV
I don't know what kind of scope you're planning for the channel, but I'd be incredibly interested in more info on early 50s rocket engines and how we got to standard combustion based gas generator cycles
This was a very good video and a great explanation! Just to add, the US designed line of these engines was called NAA 75-110-A1 through NAA 75-110-A7. They all looked rather similar, and were interchangeable. The version number A7 started to fly in 1958, while A1 first flew in 1953, on the first flight of Redstone. NAA stood for North American Aviation (NAA), the parent company of Rocketdyne. The 75 in the part number was for the thrust, equal to 75 thousand pounds of force.
I didn't like the voice over going with the gestures that much , but I must say you make very good informative video's on the V2 with seemingly well reasearched conent. Learned a lot, like it a lot.
I'm guessing thrust vectoring by moving the whole engine was in the back of the minds of the engineers, probably from the very earliest designs. Really excellent knowledge based video, looking forward to the next video. The pipe bending benches at peenemunde were very interesting, ever tried using their methods for bending pipes, seems just a vice and some sort of jig is required, I'm guessing quite a bit of skill also needs to be learned.
Hi there, thanks for your generosity. No, you haven't missed it - we are working on it, so please stay tuned, and thanks again for your kind support. Kind regards, RJD
Comments for the algorithm. But more seriously and I thought I just had. How much did the Regulus system or the other immediate post-war systems beyond Redstone owe to the V2 family? In terms of parts and/or components not just German staff and generic expertise.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing!...comparing the flat face of the redstone engine injector with the much later Saturn F1 engine solution to the instability problem makes one wonder why the Germans or the redstone engineers didn't make what now seems a logical step and divide the injector face with baffles to contain the resonance? I read somewhere the early Russian engine designs suffered from similar instability but they solved it by adding lots of small more robust engines hence the R7 (and perhaps Musk?) Look to the vehicle...
Thanks to all of you who comment and provide feedback - it's important to us and helps shape the channel. But as Gordon Cooper may have said: funding makes this bird go up! So we have recently started SuperThanks, and our sincere thanks go to Blake and gshort47087 for directly supporting our work. All funding support is most welcome, but your comments are important too, so please keep them coming! Thanks for watching. Kind regards Robert J Dalby
Cc translation please of videos
Fantastic video, thanks! The use of the models really help to bring your point across.
A friend was an engineer at Glenn L Martin in the 1950s. He worked on the other cousin of the V-2 the Viking. One of his jobs was to measure the deflection of the structure that supported the engine, the deflection had to be figured into the controls of the rocket. They planned to load the rocket with hydraulic jacks and measure the deflection with dial indicators. My friend was told to just stick his head into the bottom of the rocket and read the dial indicators. He politely refused and suggested that they could cut some holes in the skirt without affecting anythng. Good thing they did because one afternoon during a test the whole assembly squashed into a heap of junk.
Hi there, and thanks for posting. The US aerospace industry of the 1950s was a bit more gung-ho and a lot less fearful of injury litigation! If you haven't already done so, please don't forget to subscribe - it helps us more than you might think and ensures you won't miss our next upload on the A4/V2 missile. KR RJD A&NTV
I don't know what kind of scope you're planning for the channel, but I'd be incredibly interested in more info on early 50s rocket engines and how we got to standard combustion based gas generator cycles
Fascinating how the red stone was a evolution of the V2.
EVERY rocket is an evolution of the V2
.
This was a very good video and a great explanation!
Just to add, the US designed line of these engines was called NAA 75-110-A1 through NAA 75-110-A7. They all looked rather similar, and were interchangeable. The version number A7 started to fly in 1958, while A1 first flew in 1953, on the first flight of Redstone.
NAA stood for North American Aviation (NAA), the parent company of Rocketdyne. The 75 in the part number was for the thrust, equal to 75 thousand pounds of force.
I love your videos, been watching you for years. I mostly love your astronomy videos and any other space related content!!!
Absolutely brilliant, stuff, seeing the connections and evolution is fascinating.
🚀 Unbelievable , the
Concise Design A7 ...
Demonstrate s Efficiency ... 👍
Konrad Dannenberg was such a nice man. He used to visit Space Camp classes and tell stories.
Thank you for that. I miss him everyday. Konrad was my first husband.
I always look forward to your rocket videos. Your explanations are so clear and concise. Thanks.
I really look forward to your videos, I have been following your channel for many years.
The final frontier started on the ground. What an amazing time it was. I would have loved to be a part of that.
Thanks for posting this.
Very nicely presented... Maybe you could describe the USSR A-4 versions & Related designs history...
amazing technical details and comparison with further engine design
Tha K you for sharing. Very interesting.
I didn't like the voice over going with the gestures that much , but I must say you make very good informative video's on the V2 with seemingly well reasearched conent. Learned a lot, like it a lot.
I'm guessing thrust vectoring by moving the whole engine was in the back of the minds of the engineers, probably from the very earliest designs. Really excellent knowledge based video, looking forward to the next video. The pipe bending benches at peenemunde were very interesting, ever tried using their methods for bending pipes, seems just a vice and some sort of jig is required, I'm guessing quite a bit of skill also needs to be learned.
Thank you!
As a rocket nerd, this is truly great stuff.
Thanks, fascinating explanation.
Hello - thanks for your encouragement and generosity. Kind regards, RJD
Great presentation!
Amazing work! Thank you very much :)
Worth noting that the A-7 and A-4 use different (but similar) numbering, the US A-1 was an upgraded A-4 design (because why make numbering easy)
Not a fan of rockets, but a fan of Robert. I’ll watch anyway.
Interesting and well made, thanks!
amazing stuff, thank you!
From A7 to F-1. What a journey...
Wonderful content as ever. 👍
Brill! Did I miss Turbo pump part 2?
Hi there, thanks for your generosity. No, you haven't missed it - we are working on it, so please stay tuned, and thanks again for your kind support. Kind regards, RJD
Waiting for you to talk about scramjets and ramjets
.How does the 8 ton valve factor into the ballistic trajectory on a V2?
Comments for the algorithm.
But more seriously and I thought I just had. How much did the Regulus system or the other immediate post-war systems beyond Redstone owe to the V2 family? In terms of parts and/or components not just German staff and generic expertise.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing!...comparing the flat face of the redstone engine injector with the much later Saturn F1 engine solution to the instability problem makes one wonder why the Germans or the redstone engineers didn't make what now seems a logical step and divide the injector face with baffles to contain the resonance? I read somewhere the early Russian engine designs suffered from similar instability but they solved it by adding lots of small more robust engines hence the R7 (and perhaps Musk?) Look to the vehicle...
good
Who laanded on ze moon first? Say it!