Ramjet artillery shell of a big size

[Destroyer500]

It strikes me that you are not listening to what you are being told. Presumably, you asked your question on this forum because you recognize that at least some of the folks here know what they are talking about. Why do that and then not listen? You seem to be trying to force a particular solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

There hasnt been a single forum where i have proposed a single thing and people agreed no matter what the topic was.So disagreement is something im used to and i dont consider it as evidence for anything.Even on gaming forums where i used to hang out when that was a hobby of mine where there isnt anything really of importance being discussed people disagree on some of the most basic things,when in certain cases it works against them and everyone has an opinion of their own.Millitary forums are even worse since there the only thing one can do without a lot of disagreement and frustration or frowned faces behind the screen is asking for pictures or some sort of document or book.And the thing with military forums is that you cant propose a thing because they take it like an insult if it goes against their opinion.Just go on any one of them and do a post about something an army doing a different attack or anything and all the grumpy grandpas wake up because you arent supposed to say that because something.
I dont work that way and i will not work that way.If something seems like it could be done then i will do everything i can to prove it and if i cant ill disprove it.
On the military forums my threads werent less than 20 pages long which is usually how much it took for someone to seriously consider what i was saying and either tell me that it couldnt be done with actual evidence or just tell me it could be done but in a different way.
Now you are smarter than them and because im bored of going in circles if you really want to disprove me it will happen if;1)you show me that the guidance system of something like the V2 wont fit inside the shell or even if it fits that it wont communicate properly with the outside world 2)you show me that with a 10 year development time and a lot of resources a highly efficient ramjet for the time or a way to propel the shell at such a distance is not achievable 3)show me that the fuel needed inside the shell will be too much and thus there isnt enough space to even propel the thing for that long.
If one of the above problems cannot be solved in any way then i will accept it and move on.If im not given an example,like it was done above where a purely balistic shells parameters were calculated,or some sort of example from tech of the era that research was being done upon but due to limitations of the time they couldnt get it to be any better and the problem wasnt that they didnt care to research the thing,then i will accept defeat and go home.Its not just out of stubornness its also about learning something.If im just being told it cant be done im really learning nothing.I want to know why it cant be done,if that is the case.

 

[Drakkith]

I am certain that countries like the US that were far better in electronics than the Germans could make something even more reliable when it comes to the guidance.

We weren't THAT much more advanced than Germany. The limiting factor in using radio beams is probably that the accuracy depends on the size of the receiving antennas (larger is better), the wavelength of the signal (smaller is better), and the separation between the transmitting towers (larger is better, within reason). The size of the antenna is set by the size of the projectile while the wavelength of the signal depends on the equipment you have available and how well the different wavelengths travel through the atmosphere and over the horizon.

Note that there were several navigation methods using radio waves as guidance signals. Even aircraft carriers commonly used them to help get their aircraft back to the ship after a mission. But none were so accurate that you could use them to guide a pilot-less aircraft to a target smaller than the size of a city.

Im gonna do the same for the shell but i will place antenas on trucks throughout the whole path of the thing so that any huge deviation can be corrected.

Where is this supposed to be launched from?

The targets are still going to be cities or factories so we dont need to be extremely accurate but we need to at least have a handful kilometers margin of error not tens of kilometers margin of error.

Factories require a margin of error in the scale of tens of meters, not kilometers.

I have been on multiple forums and discussed a lot of ideas of mine.I will defend them as much as that makes sense so keep critisizing and thinking of ways to show me it cant be done and i will do the opposite for as long as possible.

It is easy to defend an idea that is vague or that ignores all realistic constraints.

Now you are smarter than them and because im bored of going in circles if you really want to disprove me it will happen if;1)you show me that the guidance system of something like the V2 wont fit inside the shell or even if it fits that it wont communicate properly with the outside world 2)you show me that with a 10 year development time and a lot of resources a highly efficient ramjet for the time or a way to propel the shell at such a distance is not achievable 3)show me that the fuel needed inside the shell will be too much and thus there isnt enough space to even propel the thing for that long.

No one can do this because we don't have any actual specifications on anything except the size of the projectile. How big is the engine? How much thrust can it provide? How much fuel does it use at various speeds and altitudes? What altitude will your 'projectile' primarily travel at? How much drag will it have? How much fuel can it carry? How large and heavy is the guidance system, hydraulics, compressed air tanks, batteries, and/or whatever else you need to control the projectile?

I realize that you don't know any of this information, but neither do we. What would you like us to do?

 

[Destroyer500]

We weren't THAT much more advanced than Germany. The limiting factor in using radio beams is probably that the accuracy depends on the size of the receiving antennas (larger is better), the wavelength of the signal (smaller is better), and the separation between the transmitting towers (larger is better, within reason). The size of the antenna is set by the size of the projectile while the wavelength of the signal depends on the equipment you have available and how well the different wavelengths travel through the atmosphere and over the horizon.

Note that there were several navigation methods using radio waves as guidance signals. Even aircraft carriers commonly used them to help get their aircraft back to the ship after a mission. But none were so accurate that you could use them to guide a pilot-less aircraft to a target smaller than the size of a city.

Where is this supposed to be launched from?

Factories require a margin of error in the scale of tens of meters, not kilometers.

It is easy to defend an idea that is vague or that ignores all realistic constraints.

No one can do this because we don't have any actual specifications on anything except the size of the projectile. How big is the engine? How much thrust can it provide? How much fuel does it use at various speeds and altitudes? What altitude will your 'projectile' primarily travel at? How much drag will it have? How much fuel can it carry? How large and heavy is the guidance system, hydraulics, compressed air tanks, batteries, and/or whatever else you need to control the projectile?

I realize that you don't know any of this information, but neither do we. What would you like us to do?

I have no comment on the radio guidance other than to post something i found http://www.v2rocket.com/start/deployment/leitstrahl.html

So it worked as i somewhat imagined

The shell is going to be launched from the gun that wont change.

On the website above it sais at some point "To hit a target within a 250 meters radius and 250 km's away" so i guess they went with 1 meter deviation for every kilometer ? So i guess in 1000km 1km deviation ? Of course its not a rocket so it work exactly like that but im just making a guess.Maybe if the plane guidance Fritz X style can reduce that deviation before the descent.

I had already written the specifications for such a shell and also some information about the engine and was about to hit send when i found out about a guy called Wolf Trommsdorff and he had exactly the same ideas as me,excluding the guidance and the giant guns
https://en.topwar.ru/165108-aktivno-reaktivnye-snarjady-v-trommsdorffa-germanija.html
https://www.fliegerrevuex.aero/mach-35-interkontinentalflugkoerper-der-luftwaffe-1944/
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/trommsdorff-projects-ww2.6832/
https://en.topwar.ru/163751-aktivno...teljami-konstrukcii-a-lippisha-germanija.html
https://min.news/en/military/f804cb68e1665e6312dc0b10a2830cb3.html

If you open this website and then book he is mentioned in the early days section https://dl.begellhouse.com/fr/download/article/0ef8891227c0632e/IJEMCP2105(1)-38741.pdf

 

[Astronuc]

IRC, German V3 system, which used multiple charges in barrels' 'side-pockets' proved an abysmal failure. Worse, battery could neither dodge nor hide when RAF came knocking. Aren't the massive remnants still deep under their hill, albeit as 'war grave'??

I knew it as "Hochdruckpumpe" - it was rendered inactive by repeated allied bombings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-3_cannon

Gerald Bull made a supergun from 2 16-inch (40.64 cm) naval rifles. It was not mobile but static land based.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HARP

IIRC, the slew of 50s & 60s ramjet Surface-to-Air missiles (SAMs) had solid first-stage booster rockets, allowing 'zero-length' launch.

BOMARC used 2 ramjets with a rocket motor for launch (climb phase).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIM-10_Bomarc

Snark was another long range cruise missile
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SM-62_Snark1 km/s would be Mach 2.9, so not quite hypersonic but definitely supersonic, and with such a speed, the vehicle would have to fly at relative high altitude to have sufficient range and avoid aerodynamic heating and hydrodynamic forces. One might look at the performance of the SR-71, from what is available in the open literature.

An initial lauch could use a electro-magnetic launch system. I visited a facility that launch small projectiles at up to 3 km/s.

 

[Destroyer500]

I knew it as "Hochdruckpumpe" - it was rendered inactive by repeated allied bombings.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-3_cannon

Gerald Bull made a supergun from 2 16-inch (40.64 cm) naval rifles. It was not mobile but static land based.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HARPBOMARC used 2 ramjets with a rocket motor for launch (climb phase).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIM-10_Bomarc

Snark was another long range cruise missile
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SM-62_Snark1 km/s would be Mach 2.9, so not quite hypersonic but definitely supersonic, and with such a speed, the vehicle would have to fly at relative high altitude to have sufficient range and avoid aerodynamic heating and hydrodynamic forces. One might look at the performance of the SR-71, from what is available in the open literature.

An initial lauch could use a electro-magnetic launch system. I visited a facility that launch small projectiles at up to 3 km/s.

I know of the V3,Bull and yesteday found out about BOMARC.Snark ive never heard off

Havent done much research on the SR-71 but i remember that it was using a scramjet so thats a bit too far fetched for the ww2 era

Electro magnetic launch ? So the projectile is fired by a standard gun and is then accelerated ? But isnt that a railgun ? Also dont railgun throw just tungsten rods so no actual explosive payload or am i wrong ?

 

[Astronuc]

Havent done much research on the SR-71 but i remember that it was using a scramjet so thats a bit too far fetched for the ww2 era

The SR-71 used a conventional (Pratt & Whitney J58) turbo jet engine behind a spike ram intake. It was technology developed post WWII in the mid-1950s, and was first run in 1958.

Electro magnetic launch ? So the projectile is fired by a standard gun and is then accelerated ? But isnt that a railgun ? Also dont railgun throw just tungsten rods so no actual explosive payload or am i wrong ?

EM launchers are colloquially known a 'rail-guns', but they can launch any object ahead of a metal conductor. Railguns are used for a launching ballistic projectiles, but the are not limited to such objects.