Author Topic: Redstone Q&A  (Read 659 times)

Offline DaveJ576

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 170
  • Norfolk, VA
    • Pigboats.com
  • Liked: 100
  • Likes Given: 420
Redstone Q&A
« on: 03/17/2023 07:41 pm »
I have a few questions about the Redstone and the Jupiter/Juno follow-ons:

1. The Redstone test missiles seem to have had two different versions. One that had a tapered aft unit and warhead section and one that didn't. I am willing to admit that this might be a trick of photography that makes them look different, But it sure seems like there were two versions. See the photos below.

2. It is my understanding that the Redstone missile, Jupiter-A, Mercury Redstone LVs, and the Sparta used the LOX/Alcohol fuel and the Jupiter-C and the Juno I used the LOX/Hydyne. Is this correct?

3. Does anyone have a good photograph of the Jupiter-C reentry vehicle configuration as it sat on the LV prior to launch? There are very few photos of the 2nd and 3rd Jupiter-C vehicles so it is hard to tell how the warhead and adaptor were configured.

Thank you!


"We have a pitch and a roll program and man this baby is really going!"

Offline Proponent

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7208
  • Liked: 2708
  • Likes Given: 1423
Re: Redstone Q&A
« Reply #1 on: 03/17/2023 08:16 pm »
Great photos.  Thank you!

I especially like the "IRBMa" on missile 18, really carrying the Jupiter obfuscation to an extreme.

I don't know about Sparta, but of the others I was under the impression that of the others only Juno I used hydyne, and I would be very surprised if Mercury-Redstone did.  Performance was really critical for satellite launches but not for the other missions, so why bother with hydyne?

I've just searched the index of the first edition of The First Space Race but, to my surprise, found no index entry for hydyne.
« Last Edit: 03/17/2023 08:19 pm by Proponent »

Offline Jim

  • Night Gator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 36332
  • Cape Canaveral Spaceport
  • Liked: 18976
  • Likes Given: 400
Re: Redstone Q&A
« Reply #2 on: 03/17/2023 08:25 pm »
I have a few questions about the Redstone and the Jupiter/Juno follow-ons:

1. The Redstone test missiles seem to have had two different versions. One that had a tapered aft unit and warhead section and one that didn't. I am willing to admit that this might be a trick of photography that makes them look different, But it sure seems like there were two versions. See the photos below.

2. It is my understanding that the Redstone missile, Jupiter-A, Mercury Redstone LVs, and the Sparta used the LOX/Alcohol fuel and the Jupiter-C and the Juno I used the LOX/Hydyne. Is this correct?

3. Does anyone have a good photograph of the Jupiter-C reentry vehicle configuration as it sat on the LV prior to launch? There are very few photos of the 2nd and 3rd Jupiter-C vehicles so it is hard to tell how the warhead and adaptor were configured.

Thank you!




1.  Same tapered.  Just photo distortion.  If there are fins, then tapered.
2.  correct
3.  The RV sat on top of the tub
I wrote a two part article on the Spin Test Facility that was used to prep the cluster of solid motors for Jupiter-C, Juno I and Juno II.  I have photos of all 19 payloads in the facility.  I got them scanned from the JPL archives.  I wasn't interested in pad photos since I was writing about the facility.
« Last Edit: 03/17/2023 08:58 pm by Jim »

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14951
  • Liked: 7626
  • Likes Given: 1218
Re: Redstone Q&A
« Reply #3 on: 03/17/2023 08:44 pm »
I have a few questions about the Redstone and the Jupiter/Juno follow-ons:

1. The Redstone test missiles seem to have had two different versions. One that had a tapered aft unit and warhead section and one that didn't. I am willing to admit that this might be a trick of photography that makes them look different, But it sure seems like there were two versions. See the photos below.
There were several versions.  The early R&D "Block 1" R&D Redstones primarily tested propulsion and flight control, etc., so these (a handful) had a conical upper section and were shorter than the later "Block 2" Redstones (both in total length and in the length of the main "Thrust Unit" part.  The later Block 2 R&D missiles and the Tactical Redstones had the longer, tapered, separable "Body" (warhead + aft unit sections).
Quote
2. It is my understanding that the Redstone missile, Jupiter-A, Mercury Redstone LVs, and the Sparta used the LOX/Alcohol fuel and the Jupiter-C and the Juno I used the LOX/Hydyne. Is this correct?
Some, a few, R&D Redstones also used Hydyne in test flights.  There really was enormous variety among the Redstone/Jupiter-A/C, Mercury Redstone, and Sparta vehicles that flew.  The Jupiter-C tanks were stretched even more than the Block 2 Redstones, etc.
Quote
3. Does anyone have a good photograph of the Jupiter-C reentry vehicle configuration as it sat on the LV prior to launch? There are very few photos of the 2nd and 3rd Jupiter-C vehicles so it is hard to tell how the warhead and adaptor were configured.
Looks like Jim got it.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 03/17/2023 09:58 pm by edkyle99 »

Offline DaveJ576

  • Member
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 170
  • Norfolk, VA
    • Pigboats.com
  • Liked: 100
  • Likes Given: 420
Re: Redstone Q&A
« Reply #4 on: 03/17/2023 11:20 pm »
So how much Jupiter was actually in the Jupiter-A? Iíve gotten the impression that other than some common electronics the Jupiter-A was a renamed Redstone. I think it was a brilliant dodge to get around the higher Atlantic Missile Range priority for the PGM-19 Jupiter. It allowed the Army to get this early IRBM into service quicker.
"We have a pitch and a roll program and man this baby is really going!"

Offline edkyle99

  • Expert
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14951
  • Liked: 7626
  • Likes Given: 1218
Re: Redstone Q&A
« Reply #5 on: 03/18/2023 03:42 am »
Jupiter-A missiles were Redstone missiles used "to prove components for the Jupiter missile"  There were 25 Jupiter-A missiles.   They were "used to obtain design data, to prove the guidance system, to evolve separation procedures, and to develop other special information that was used in the Jupiter program".  Meanwhile, Jupiter-C was a stretched, evolved Redstone designed to test scaled Jupiter reentry vehicles, so it was also under the Jupiter IRBM program umbrella.  Quotes are from the official Redstone US Army history.  Jupiter was a higher priority program than Redstone at the time, yes, but the real impetus was that already-flying Redstones could test Jupiter missile systems many months earlier than possible if they only flew on still in development Jupiter missiles.

 - Ed Kyle
« Last Edit: 03/18/2023 03:47 am by edkyle99 »

Tags:
 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement SkyTale Software GmbH
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0