Other than Goddard?

A google search failed to reveal any other actual research into developing soild or liquid fuel rockets previous to the German efforts of the nazi era. Other than Goddard there were some theoretical proposals or studies, but I've not yet turned up any actual lab bench or field trial work. Any experts able to direct me to others than Goddard or the German research?

Assuming other research on the level of Goddards after 1900 how likely it it this might be taken up by military or atmospheric research & what might be the most fertile nations for this to occur?

I'm thinking the USSR is a possible.
 
Certainly early in WW2 the British had something of an obsession with solid-fuel rockets. Mostly Unrotated Projectiles, 60lb air to ground rockets and the like, but they spent vast amounts of money on them and were working on a guided SAM (BEN/Brakemine/Stooge) based on them at the end of the war. There was a small amount of liquid fuelled work which I **think** was at most inspired by the Germans rather than copying their designs (LOPGAP), but they were overwhelmingly thinking in terms of solid fuel until about the time of Blue Steel/Blue Streak which AIUI were largely derived from the German work.
 
There's GIRD in the Soviet Union, which included many to-be-famous names (like Valentin Glushko and Sergei Korolev--the former would be the major Soviet liquid engine guru during the space race) as well as some who were sort of Goddard-equivalents: Friedrich Zander was an early pioneer in Soviet engine development, but died in 1933 at the relatively young age of 45.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Define "Nazi Era"

A google search failed to reveal any other actual research into developing soild or liquid fuel rockets previous to the German efforts of the nazi era. Other than Goddard there were some theoretical proposals or studies, but I've not yet turned up any actual lab bench or field trial work. Any experts able to direct me to others than Goddard or the German research?

Assuming other research on the level of Goddards after 1900 how likely it it this might be taken up by military or atmospheric research & what might be the most fertile nations for this to occur?

I'm thinking the USSR is a possible.

Goddard got his start with USG funding working for Army Ordnance on what amounted to anti-tank rockets in WW I, and with the Ordnance Corps involvement at Aberdeen (IIRC) he wasn't exactly alone. NRL and BuOrd worked on rockets, of course, which is what led to JATO/RATO in the 1940s, and there were a number of people with connections to Reaction Motors at NRL doing a variety of R&D, including Bob Truax and Milt Rosen. In parallel with Goddard was the GALCIT-ORDCIT-JPL-Aerojet effort in Southern California in the late '30s into the 1940s, which is where Von Karman, Parsons, Malina, and Tsien got their hands-on early experience, and which led to various interesting developments. There's the whole Army effort that led to the X-1 and the Army-Convair HIROC effort led by Charlie Brossart that led to the Atlas. U.S. Entry to WW II really opened the spigots, of course.

Best,
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Certainly early in WW2 the British had something of an obsession with solid-fuel rockets. Mostly Unrotated Projectiles, 60lb air to ground rockets and the like, but they spent vast amounts of money on them and were working on a guided SAM (BEN/Brakemine/Stooge) based on them at the end of the war. There was a small amount of liquid fuelled work which I **think** was at most inspired by the Germans rather than copying their designs (LOPGAP), but they were overwhelmingly thinking in terms of solid fuel until about the time of Blue Steel/Blue Streak which AIUI were largely derived from the German work.
Oh, gods, yes. Millions of 1940 pounds into Unrotated Projectiles.
 
Ok, so Friedrich Zanderstarted actual lab bench work circa 1929-30. That qualifies.

Certainly early in WW2 the British had something of an obsession with solid-fuel rockets

This was all post 1938? Or was there anything before then?

Goddard got his start with USG funding working for Army Ordnance on what amounted to anti-tank rockets in WW I,

That was to be a cheap Infantry Gun. Filling the same role as the 37mm rifled breech loading weapon the French used. The AT thing came after the 1918 design was used as a starting point for the Bazooka design. Exactly how much was directly copied I cant say, tho both the 1918 weapon & the 1941 version took the HE & AP rifle grenades as the basis for the warheads.

... and with the Ordnance Corps involvement at Aberdeen (IIRC) he wasn't exactly alone. NRL and BuOrd worked on rockets, of course, which is what led to JATO/RATO in the 1940s, and there were a number of people with connections to Reaction Motors at NRL doing a variety of R&D, including Bob Truax and Milt Rosen. In parallel with Goddard was the GALCIT-ORDCIT-JPL-Aerojet effort in Southern California in the late '30s into the 1940s, ...

I'd looked for but not found anything useful on this. Any books or links to recommend?
 
Last edited:
in 1930s next Goddard and Von Braun & Co were those person working on Space Flight

Qian Xuesen (aka Tsien Hsue-shen) Chinese working in USA on R&D of Rockets and Spaceflight.
Karel Bossart a belgian with scholarship at M.I.T, he become pioneering rocket designer with Atlas ICBM

in France Jean-Jacques Barre worked on Liquid rocket engine using liquid oxygen/gasoline
even build sounding rocket "EA 1941" in 1941, right under nose of Germans occupiers

in Japan they look into liquid and Solid rocket engine research

in Great Britain was British Planetary Society under Arthur C. Clarke! study Solid rocket engine.

Italy got Gaetano Crocco who start research in monopropellants rocket engines
 
The absolute classic on the subject is John D.Clark's Ignition! long out of print but easily available as a PDF; a rocket engineer himself, he wrote it mainly to stop his younger colleagues making the same mistakes over and over again, and as a result it does cover a lot of history.

Just Google his name and the third or fourth link down should give you the option of downloading it.
 
For books on GALCIT, the best bet is to read about the people in it.
Theodore Von Karman had an autobiography, "The Wind and Beyond." Iris Chang did an excellent biography of Tsien, "Thread of the Silkworm". At least two books were written about Parsons, "Sex and Rockets" (published by an independent publisher, and has some wilder things) and "Strange Angel" (published by a mainstream publisher- but covers a lot more). Both deal more with Parsons's...unique activities.
 
Thanks. that looks very useful
Got to agree there, it's very dense so took me a while to digest, but has an awful lot of information in it. From memory the British barely rate a mention while the Italians did quite a lot, and the guy in charge of the programme for a while was a close relative of Mussolini.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Frank Malina is probably the most overlooked

For books on GALCIT, the best bet is to read about the people in it.
Theodore Von Karman had an autobiography, "The Wind and Beyond." Iris Chang did an excellent biography of Tsien, "Thread of the Silkworm". At least two books were written about Parsons, "Sex and Rockets" (published by an independent publisher, and has some wilder things) and "Strange Angel" (published by a mainstream publisher- but covers a lot more). Both deal more with Parsons's...unique activities.

Frank Malina is probably the most overlooked; Summerfield as well.

Best,
 
Looks like there was a fair amount of theoretical and lab bench start up. Enough for more than one opportunity for real development had anyone invested in a larger course of research and field trials. Reaching back to 1925 or earlier there is less to build on, but still a few possibilities other than Goddard.

However, the one common theme for all these is a lack of serious interest & large scale research funds.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
Yep; Big Science requires Big Government money

Looks like there was a fair amount of theoretical and lab bench start up. Enough for more than one opportunity for real development had anyone invested in a larger course of research and field trials. Reaching back to 1925 or earlier there is less to build on, but still a few possibilities other than Goddard.

However, the one common theme for all these is a lack of serious interest & large scale research funds.

Yep; Big Science requires Big Government money, and that came (historically) in 1861-66 and 1917-20 and 1940-48 and 1950-2015...

Absent the above, good luck.

The flip side, however, is once the spigots open, at least in the US, there was always enough capacity to absorb it and provide results. Given that the Manhattan Project produced two entirely separate R&D and supply chains for not only two separate operational weapons AND there was simultaneous development of two entirely separate delivery systems, both of which made it to IOC in time to have been useful if necessary - and the above happened at the same time as the "conventional" mobilization, plus various and sundry chemists and biologists nightmares that were never used - puts the capabilities of the US into perspective vis a vis the rest of the world.

Add those of the British to those of the US, and its no contest.

Add those of the Soviets to those of the British and those of the US, and it is amazing how little of a contest it is...

Again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_DnRn9hyFU

Best,
 
Top