Explorer1/Jupiter C (Juno1) information.

[john jacomb]

Can anyone help me?

I need to get details, reports, photograph's and detailed text on the Explorer 1 mission of 31 January 1958; including details of planning the missions, testing etc. In particular I have to source detailed scale plans of the Explorer 1 vehicle itself. Unfortunately, Rockets of the World is not detailed enough.


With thanks, John.

 

[hokkyokusei]

There's lots of information out there on the web. You don't say what you already already have, but here are a couple of links:

https://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/sputnik/expinfo.html
https://www.fact-index.com/e/ex/explorer_1.html

 

[sandman]

Lots of info available!

https://www.astronautix.com/lvs/jupiterc.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter-C_(rocket)

https://www.spaceline.org/rocketsum/jupiter-c.html

This is the best one I found!

https://www.westspacetech.9f.com/TR#9.pdf

And on the satelite Explorer 1

https://www.astronautix.com/craft/exporera.htm

Explorer 1 was the first US satelite and unlike the Russian satelite Sputnik 1 the Explorer 1 actually did something other than "beep" back a radio signal. It was more propaganda than a scientific accomplishment.

https://www.batnet.com/mfwright/sputnik.html

Explorer 1 was launched during the 1958 IGY (International Geophysical Year) and actually did some real science. It discovered the Van Allen Belt.

 

[DynaSoar]

Originally posted by sandman
Explorer 1 was launched during the 1958 IGY (International Geophysical Year) and actually did some real science. It discovered the Van Allen Belt.

Explorer 1 was launched vertically. It discovered the Van Allen Belt.

If it had been launched horizontally, would it have discovered the Van Allen Suspenders?



Sorry, still silly over that picture of rocket balloons "chasing" that truck.

 

[john jacomb]

I am grateful to Sandman and Hokkyokusei for these links. There's plenty to keep me occupied in this and the textual content is great.
I still need detailed scale drawings, these links seem to have outline drawings rather than detail. I will keep looking.
Does anyone have information on the tests carried out on Explorer 1 before the mission? Was it flown separately and if so, when??
Much appreciated,
John.

 

[Stymye]

lots of launchers
not many drawings but may link to more info

https://www.skyrocket.de/space/launcher.htm

 

[hokkyokusei]

Originally posted by john jacomb
I am grateful to Sandman and Hokkyokusei for these links. There's plenty to keep me occupied in this and the textual content is great.
I still need detailed scale drawings, these links seem to have outline drawings rather than detail. I will keep looking.

How detailed do they need to be? What scale are you modelling at?

Does anyone have information on the tests carried out on Explorer 1 before the mission?

You might find some stuff about this on one of the various NASA web sites. A lot of scans of original reports, in .pdf format, have appeared there recently. I hesitate to suggest asking over at sci.space.history (if people are offended by rec.models.rockets then they certainly shouldn't look at sci.space.history), but there are some knowledgeable people over there.

Was it flown separately and if so, when??
Much appreciated,
John.

I'm not sure what you mean by flown seperately?

 

[hokkyokusei]

Specifically, you might want to check out the NASA technical reports server.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/index.cgi?method=simple

Even if the documents you need aren't avaliable in .pdf, they can be ordered.

 

[john jacomb]

Much obliged for the links.

I want to model this roc in either 1/4 or 1/3 scale, but have not yet decided, although I am leaning towards 1/3 which would make it 2" diameter and 26.53" long.

By 'launched separately' I mean't was it test launched by itself ie. not attached to the Jupiter C mothership.

Seriously though, you have all been most helpful and I really appreciate your assistance.

John

 

[JStarStar]

The Explorer I satellite, at least in the configuration that was launched into orbit, wasn't intended to be launched on its own - it was designed to be fired out of the spinning 'tub' stage mounted on the nose of the Redstone booster.

The Redstone would lift off and the vehicle would get enough altitude to clear most of the atmospheric resistance. The 'tub' stage would fire and the vehicle would gain more speed. Finally when the 'tub' stage burned out, the final stage would fire to give the satellite orbital velocity.

As a result, the Explorer I itself didn't have fins and probably wouldn't fly stable if you built a model of the orbital vehicle itself. (Although clear plastic fins could work.)

The Explorer stages, I believe, were based on the U.S. Army "Sergeant" solid-fuel misssile, which I think did fly as a SAM weapon. I could be wrong on that, if so, someone will probably correct me.

 

[Bill]

Originally posted by JStarStar
The Explorer I satellite, at least in the configuration that was launched into orbit, wasn't intended to be launched on its own - it was designed to be fired out of the spinning 'tub' stage mounted on the nose of the Redstone booster.

The Redstone would lift off and the vehicle would get enough altitude to clear most of the atmospheric resistance. The 'tub' stage would fire and the vehicle would gain more speed. Finally when the 'tub' stage burned out, the final stage would fire to give the satellite orbital velocity.

As a result, the Explorer I itself didn't have fins and probably wouldn't fly stable if you built a model of the orbital vehicle itself. (Although clear plastic fins could work.)

The Explorer stages, I believe, were based on the U.S. Army "Sergeant" solid-fuel misssile, which I think did fly as a SAM weapon. I could be wrong on that, if so, someone will probably correct me.

Those solid motors are "baby Sergeants", not the same as that from the Sergeant missile. This terminology had me really confused when I, as a kid, was trying to build a static model of the Juno 2 with separable stages. The baby Sergeant is 6" in diameter, the Sergeant missile is much larger.

The Explorer flight profile is actually much more interesting than you described. The Redstone alone has enough power to boost a payload to orbital altitude. But it would not have enough angular momentum (horizontal velocity) to stay in orbit. The several upper stages of solid motors would have to complete this job.

If you watch video of a Juno I launch, you might see the "tub" spinning to give it enough stability to perform a tricky orbital maneuver. After Redstone burnout, the "tub" separates and coasts up to orbital altitude. Gas jets then orient the vehicle horizontally and the upper stages fire in rapid succession to get Explorer up to orbital velocity.


Bill