Redstone/Atlas airframe question

[Simsup]

I'm a nuts and bolts kinda guy.  Years ago, I was reading a book, and in it - it was comparing the airframe thickness of the Atlas rocket to the Redstone.  I can no longer remember which book that was in, and cant find it anywhere else.  Does anyone know the airframe thickness of these?  All I can get now is some saying that the Atlas was no thicker than a dime; and thus dubbing it the airbag or balloon.  Being a nuts and bolts guy, I naturally prefer the thickness stated in units of measure.  Thanks in advance.     

 

[Slava33]

Replying to:<BR/><DIV CLASS='Discussion_PostQuote'>I'm a nuts and bolts kinda guy.&nbsp; Years ago, I was reading a book, and in it - it was comparing the airframe thickness of the Atlas&nbsp;rocket to the Redstone.&nbsp; I can no longer remember which book that was in, and cant find it anywhere else.&nbsp; Does anyone know the airframe thickness of these?&nbsp; All I can get now is some saying that the Atlas was no thicker than a dime; and thus dubbing it the airbag or balloon.&nbsp; Being a nuts and bolts guy,&nbsp;I naturally prefer the thickness stated in units of measure.&nbsp; Thanks in advance.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /><p> Posted by Simsup</DIV></p><p>Wikipedia page for the Redstone missile has a link to a NASA memo describing the rocket. &nbsp;It lists the fuel tank wall thickness of 0.063 in and LOX tank at 0.08 in. &nbsp;This page with historical info on the Atlas missile mentions the LOX tank wall thickness <em>"varied from 0.012 of an inch to 0.038 of an inch &mdash; roughly the thickness of one to four standard playing card". </em>&nbsp;Looks like they made the Atlas much more "balloony" than even the Redstone was.<img src="http://sitelife.space.com/ver1.0/content/scripts/tinymce/plugins/emotions/images/smiley-smile.gif" border="0" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /></p> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[vulture4]

The Atlas was indeed a balloon with a true pressure-supported stainless steel primary structure. Even Atlas rockets in museum displays usually have an air line connected to maintain a couple psi of internal pressure; otherwise they start to look wrinkled (if horizontal) and could even collapse (if vertical); you can indent the skin slightly by pressing on it with a thumb. The original Atlas is still about the closest we have come to a single stage to orbit vehicle. The Redstone had a more conventional semi-monocoque structure (I believe of aluminum) with a load-bearing skin and structural stiffeners.

 

[Simsup]

<p>Thanks vulture & slava&nbsp;for your post.&nbsp; I appreciate it.</p><p>&nbsp;</p>

 

[vogon13]

Re:

The Atlas was indeed a balloon with a true pressure-supported stainless steel primary structure. Even Atlas rockets in museum displays usually have an air line connected to maintain a couple psi of internal pressure; otherwise they start to look wrinkled (if horizontal) and could even collapse (if vertical); you can indent the skin slightly by pressing on it with a thumb. The original Atlas is still about the closest we have come to a single stage to orbit vehicle. The Redstone had a more conventional semi-monocoque structure (I believe of aluminum) with a load-bearing skin and structural stiffeners.

Less two (of three) engines, an entire Atlas vehicle was orbited successfully.

One might think with all the advances in materials and CAD since the Atlas was designed in the 50s, someone would have made a useful SSTO vehicle by now . . .