Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucsd!pacbell.com!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: V-3's (no Bull) Message-ID: <1991Feb21.032731.13419@cbnews.att.com> Date: 21 Feb 91 03:27:31 GMT References: <1991Feb20.054847.3041@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: U of Toronto Zoology Lines: 24 Approved: military@att.att.com From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >From: "Larry W. Jewell" > The article goes on the mention that A.H. had the site built even after >the proven failure to distract Bomber Command. Actually, other sources say that the instability problem was basically the result of not having competent ballistics people involved in the early development of the rather unconventional fin-stabilized shells, and it was solved (too late) once such people were brought in. There was also a problem with barrels bursting due to the extremely high pressures; again, this was eventually solved. The basic principle of supplementary powder charges along the barrel to achieve very high muzzle velocity is definitely workable, and this weapon could have been a severe problem to Britain had it been debugged earlier. The underlying problem was the chaotic nature of German military research, in which there was no central group responsible for evaluating weapons ideas and then arranging adequate development resources for the ones that looked promising. -- "Read the OSI protocol specifications? | Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology I can't even *lift* them!" | henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry