The fuel used by the V-2

[willpittenger]

According the Wikipedia, the V-2 used a mixture of ethanol and water. How does that combination's ISP compare with Kerosene or Hydrogen? Also, when the US Army and Russians starting testing V-2s, did they use the same fuel or did they pursue a more efficient fuel that would work in the V-2? Could they have used a better fuel? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[dwightlooi]

I don't think the info is right if that is indeed what they said. As far as I can remember, the V-2 is powered by burning concentrated Ethanol (75%) with Liquid Oxygen. Specific impulse is about 215 seconds at sea level, probably about ~240 seconds in vaccuum.<br /><br />Current Hydrazine-Tetroxide engines (usuallu MMH or UDMH with N2O4) are 240~290 secs. Modern Kerosene-LOX engines are about 290~340 secs. A modern LH2/LOX engine is about 365~470 secs.<br /><br />The Chinese Long March IIF, the Ariane 4, the Titan (Gemini) are Hydrazine rockets. The Atlas and most russian rockets (including the Soryuz, Sealaunch-Zenit, Proton, etc) are Kerosene rockets. The Shuttle, Delta IV, etc are Hydrogen rockets.<br />

 

[willpittenger]

Where does the Saturn V vintage F-1 fit in? Are there more modern variants of the F-1? Also, could we get more out of Ethanol today with a modern engine? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[tom_hobbes]

Just out of interest, google video or youtube, one of them has footage of actual Nazi V-2 rocket tests. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font size="2" color="#339966"> I wish I could remember<br /> But my selective memory<br /> Won't let me</font><font size="2" color="#99cc00"> </font><font size="3" color="#339966"><font size="2">- </font></font><font size="1" color="#339966">Mark Oliver Everett</font></p><p> </p> </div>

 

[tomnackid]

The V2 did indeed use a combination of ethanol and water. The water would flash into steam in the combustion chamber and help form a boundary layer that prevented burn through of the chamber and nozzle throat. This boundary layer containing some free hydrogen and oxygen dissociated from the water would ignite upon leaving the combustion chamber and gave the V2 its characteristic, fiery exhaust plume.

 

[CalliArcale]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>According the Wikipedia, the V-2 used a mixture of ethanol and water. How does that combination's ISP compare with Kerosene or Hydrogen? Also, when the US Army and Russians starting testing V-2s, did they use the same fuel or did they pursue a more efficient fuel that would work in the V-2? Could they have used a better fuel?<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />All V-2s used alcohol and LOX. It's indeed not the best, but the Nazis had a good reason for choosing it instead of kerosene. Germany has no petroleum reserves of its own, which is why the African front was so crucial to the war. (As a result of losing in Africa, the Nazis were quickly running out of fuel by the bitter end of the war.) But one thing they did have was potatoes -- lots and lots of potatoes. These were used to make ethanol, which they used as a fuel wherever they could in lieu of increasingly scarce petroleum products. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[edkyle98]

"when the US Army and Russians starting testing V-2s, did they use the same fuel or did they pursue a more efficient fuel that would work in the V-2?"<br /><br />The U.S. flew stock V-2s, propulsion-wise, to the best of my knowledge. The Navy developed the Viking sounding rocket, which also burned Alcohol/LOX, while the Army and Air Force both contributed to the development of more powerful alcohol/LOX engines through the Navaho program. One of those engines ended up powering von Braun's Redstone and Jupiter C rockets. During the early to mid 1950s, the Navaho propulsion system effort was redirected toward development, by Rocketdyne, of a three-chamber kerosene/LOX engine that never flew, but that provided the basis for the engine used by Atlas, Thor, Jupiter, Saturn I(B), and today's Delta II rocket.<br /><br />Another direction was probed by Aerojet during the late 1940s, when it developed WAC Corporal, the first U.S.-developed sounding rocket. WAC Corporal was fueled by fuming nitric acid/aniline and furfuryl alcohol. Aerojet went on to develop powerful hypergolic storable propellant engines for the Titan ICBM during the mid to late 1950s.<br /><br /> - Ed Kyle

 

[docm]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>willpittinger asked;<br /><br />Where does the Saturn V vintage F-1 fit in? Are there more modern variants of the F-1?<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote>Presuming they ever get their birds to fly SpaceX has announced that their Merlin 2 engine is a scaled down version of a future model (presumably Merlin 3) which will be an F-1 class engine (6.7 MN/1.5 million lbf). Plan is for it to power their planned "BFR" launcher. <br /><br />Yes, BFR stands for what you think it does <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /><br />Pertinent SpaceX update (Oct 2004 - Jan 2005 issue)....<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p> The next major engine development for SpaceX is the Merlin 2, where we will aim for a significant increase in thrust and chamber pressure. Merlin 2 will serve as an exact scale version of the F-1 class (>1,500,000 lb thrust) engine we intend to start developing in a few years. Target performance numbers will be released in the spring.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />In early 2006 Musk said this about Merlin 2;<br /><br /><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>No comment on Merlin 2 yet. We will be releasing a spec to the public in a few months. All we can say at this point is that it will be the world's largest engine, where engine is defined as a single thrust chamber (the only logical definition in my view). The Saturn F-1 was larger, but obviously is no longer in production.<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>but the Nazis<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />We can't call the scientists that created the V-2 "Nazis". They did not buy into the Nazi propaganda. Rather, they were looking for the quickest way into space. Von Bruan and others already were dreaming of space stations. They did design and build the A-4 and V-2, but only because the Nazi government had the funds to allow them to complete the research. The A-4 was what Von Braun wanted to build. The V-2 was his ticket to the A-4. (It sounds backwards, but only because the V-2 served as an excuse.) Without the V-2, he would have been grounded. <br /><br />Edit: Corrected number <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>actually A-4<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br />My memory must be failing. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[JonClarke]

Without the military investment the Germans would have stuck to small scale engineering research including flight tests. Presumably these experiments would have been disseminated amongst others hobby groups in Europe and the US. The BIS did a lot of theoretical work in the 30's, and the ARS had their own test program. Goddard was flying liquid fuelled rockets in the US even earlier, and had some funding from the Smithsonian.<br /><br />Korolov and Glushko were also flying liquid fueled rockets well before WWII and had official interest and support. It's hard to project this alternative history, but given the extensive interest in the USSR in solid propellant artillery rockets I am sure this offical support would have lead to ballistic missiles, especially once nuclear weapons became available. <br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[CalliArcale]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>We can't call the scientists that created the V-2 "Nazis".<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />I'm not. I'm referring to the entire German government and military machine, which hired the scientists and engineers to carry out their intentions. The Nazi war machine needed an alternative fuel. They could not provide the V-2 program with sufficient kerosene, so they got the scientists to come up with something else. Von Braun's team built a rocket that would fly on ethanol, the Nazis approved of this, and the program went into production. The fuel issue really was much larger than just the rocket scientists.<br /><br />Hope that helps clear up what I was talking about. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#666699"><em>"People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually from a non-linear, non-subjective viewpoint it's more like a big ball of wibbly wobbly . . . timey wimey . . . stuff."</em>  -- The Tenth Doctor, "Blink"</font></p> </div>

 

[vogon13]

The V-2 (A-4) fuel pumps were powered with hydrogen peroxide.<br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><font color="#ff0000"><strong>TPTB went to Dallas and all I got was Plucked !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#339966"><strong>So many people, so few recipes !!</strong></font></p><p><font color="#0000ff"><strong>Let's clean up this stinkhole !!</strong></font> </p> </div>

 

[shoogerbrugge]

<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr /><p>We can't call the scientists that created the V-2 "Nazis".<p><hr /></p></p></blockquote><br /><br />Neither can you lift all blame from individuals that worked, supported and even increased the effeciency of the Nazi war machine. Calling all rocket scientist Nazi's is wrong, but the other way around would also be rewriting history. Just because it aided a long term "good cause" doesn't free them from their role in inhumane actions.

 

[edkyle98]

>"We can't call the scientists that created the V-2 "Nazis"."<<br /><br />I think that we can, because most of them, including von Braun, were, and had to be in order to work in their field, "card-carrying" members of the National Socialist German Workers (Nazi) Party. But it is also true that the Nazi's (Gestapo) arrested von Braun at one point.<br /><br />Of course these Paperclip rocketeers were not Nazi's after 1945. Many of them became U.S. citizens. Von Braun was an American and a Lutheran for many more years than he was a Nazi. <br /><br /> - Ed Kyle

 

[darkenfast]

I seem to recall that there was also a technical reason for the use of alcohol-type fuels: soot buildup when kerosene was used. I believe this was still an issue when the F-1 was developed. Anyone know about this?

 

[trailrider]

The A-4 (V-2...which stands for Vengence Weapon 2, the 1 being the V-1 "Buzz Bomb" cruise missile), used 50-50 water-ethynol aka WALC both because of the availability and also because of the heat transfer characteristics. They used both regenerative and transpiration cooling.<br /><br />The XLR-11 engine family of rocket engines that powered the Bell X-1 series of supersonic aircraft, as well as the transition propulsion for the X-15 also burned WALC. I think it was the late Scott Crossfield who commented on the number of martinis that were going "overboard" while the rocket motor was running! <img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /><br />The Germans used a variety of propellants in other rockets, including Fuming Nitric Acid (Red Fuming Nitric Acid...RFNA... or White Fuming...the difference depending on the concentration of H2O mixed with the HNO3) as an oxidizer and furfuryl alcohol or aniline (C6H5NH2) as fuels.<br /><br />Following WWII, U.S. missiles using RFNA/aniline included the Lark anti-aircraft missile, which used these propellants in both the booster and sustainer motors, and, IIRC, the Nike-Ajax anti-aircraft missile, which used it in the sustainer...with a solid booster. The Corporal series also used this combo of propellants. These are hypergolic (spontaneously ignitable on contact), which eliminates the requirement for an ignition system required by hydrocarbon/LO2 propellants.<br /><br />Aniline isn't the most efficient fuel, having an ISP of around 212 at 300 psia chamber pressure. Eventually, aniline was replaced by hydrazine-based fuels, including monomethyl hydrazine (MMH), and unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazie (UDMH), and a 50/50 mix of the two developed by Aerojet, called Aerozine 50, which powered the liquid stages of the Titan ICBM/launch vehicle family.<br /><br />Oh, yes, there was the "XLR-4" static test series of 55 lbs thrust uncooled rocket motors designed and developed as a self-learning tool by a high school student back in the 1950's an

 

[JonClarke]

I am constrantly amazed at some of the odd and really nasty combinations that were tried in the early days.<br /><br />Isn't aniline highly carncinogenic? Any rise in the incidence of liver cancer amongst people who worked with these fuels?<br /><br />Jon <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><em>Whether we become a multi-planet species with unlimited horizons, or are forever confined to Earth will be decided in the twenty-first century amid the vast plains, rugged canyons and lofty mountains of Mars</em>  Arthur Clarke</p> </div>

 

[willpittenger]

Some of the fuels used by the Germans in JATO-type situations required those fueling the rocket units to wear a lot of special protection. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Will Pittenger<hr style="margin-top:0.5em;margin-bottom:0.5em" />Add this user box to your Wikipedia User Page to show your support for the SDC forums: <div style="margin-left:1em">{{User:Will Pittenger/User Boxes/Space.com Account}}</div> </div>

 

[trailrider]

There are all sorts of nasty hazards with aniline, hydrazine & associated compounds. Aniline isn't quite as volatile as the hydrazines, so the main thing is not to inhale the fumes and avoid exposure on the skin to the stuff. Not too difficult to do. Just have to be careful and wear rubber gloves, face mask, etc. Don't spill it. Keep plenty of water handy to flush with. The bigger danger is if you do absorb it into your skin: ties up the hemoglobin in your blood like carbon MONoxide! <br /><br />Hydrazine & derrivatives is nasty. There is an old "joke" that nobody knows what hydrazine smells like, because anyone who got enough of a whiff to smell it is dead!!! Not quite true...but close enough for gub'mint work! <br /><br />Nitrogen tetroxide is nasty as the vapors turn to nitric acid on contact with the moisture in your lungs as well as the sweat on your skin!!!! Killed a bunch of Russian sailors in the K-219 (NOT K-19, as in the movie...different sub) disaster. K-19 didn't sink, K-219 was ultimately scuttled by "his" (Russian call their subs by masculine terms) captain.<br /><br />Fuming (red or white) nitric acid is nitrogen tet with the water already in it! Same problems with spills, vapors, etc. Personnel handling nitrogen tet or FNA wear air pacs with teflon seals. When I did my rocket engine test firings the technicians at the test sites I was using did the propellant loading.<br /><br />FOLKS SHOULD NOT MESS WITH THIS STUFF UNLESS THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING AND HAVE THE PROPER EQUIPMENT!<br /><br />Ad Luna! Ad Ares! Ad Astra!