Picture of the day

diopter said:
Not so trivial when you remember they also had diesel fueled motor aircraft.
Click to expand...

Less trivial yet if tasked with refueling the ME163.

T-Stoff and C-Stoff were not to be mixed anywhere else but in the combustion chamber of the aircraft. Separate trucks, hoses, funnels, and other associated bits. And VERY clear markings on everything:

eb620123e075ce4cccb36f3e52e08f0b--komet-delta-wing.jpg


Get that even a little wrong and you're gonna probably die horribly. Here, a steely-nerved fellow fills the C-Stoff tank.

2363c196bd54940aab66c9dd16c4bebf.jpg


Note the casual attire. C-Stoff was the less-horrible of the two substances. This from Wikipedia:

C-Stoff ("C substance") was a reductant used in bipropellant rocket fuels (as a fuel itself) developed by Hellmuth Walter Kommanditgesellschaft in Germany during World War II. It was developed for use with T-Stoff (a high test peroxide), as an oxidizer, which together with C-Stoff as the fuel, forms a hypergolic mixture.

Methanol CH3OH ~57% by Weight
Hydrazine hydrate N2H4 · H2O ~30% by Weight
Water H2O ~13% by Weight
Catalyst 431 K3[Cu(CN)4] potassium-cuprous cyanide coordination complex
The proportions of the components in C-Stoff were developed to catalyse the decomposition of T-Stoff, promote combustion with the oxygen released by the decomposition, and sustain uniform combustion through sufficient quantity of the highly reactive hydrazine. The combination of the C-Stoff, used as a rocket fuel, with the T-Stoff used as the oxidizer, often resulted in spontaneous explosion from their combined nature as a hypergolic fuel combination, necessitating strict hygiene in fueling operations; there were numerous catastrophic explosions of the Messerschmitt Me 163 aircraft that employed this fuel system. Another hazard was toxicity to humans of each of the propellants.
Click to expand...

T-Stoff, about 80% Hydrogen Peroxide, was nasty, nasty stuff. Much talk of pilots being dissolved in situ during crashes. Refuelling was done by dudes in head-to-toe rubberized suits.
 
The lesser known Stoffs - such as S-Stoff and U-Stoff - went on to become popular propellant choices during the dawn of the space age.
 
A-Stoff (World War I): chloroacetone (tear gas)[1]
A-Stoff (World War II): liquid oxygen (LOX)
B-Stoff: hydrazine or 75% ethanol / 25% water (used in the V-2)
Bn-Stoff (World War I): bromomethyl ethyl ketone, homomartonite (tear gas)[1]
Br-Stoff: Ligroin extracted from crude gasoline
C-Stoff: 57% methanol / 30% hydrazine / 13% water / small amount of Catalyst 431 potassium-cuprous cyanide coordination complex
F-Stoff: titanium tetrachloride
K-Stoff: methyl chloroformate
M-Stoff: methanol
N-Stoff: chlorine trifluoride
R-Stoff or Tonka: 57% monoxylidene oxide / 43% triethylamine
S-Stoff: 90% nitric acid / 10% sulfuric acid or 96% nitric acid / 4% ferric chloride (The ferric chloride acted as a catalyst.[2])
SV-Stoff or Salbei (sage): 94% nitric acid / 6% dinitrogen tetroxide or 85% nitric acid / 15% sulfuric acid
(There was also an experimental variant of S/SV-Stoff containing 90% nitric acid and 10% perchloric acid)
T-Stoff (World War I): xylyl bromide tear gas[1]
T-Stoff (World War II): 80% concentrated hydrogen peroxide / small amounts of 8-Hydroxyquinoline / 20% water used as hypergolic oxidizer with C-Stoff for the HWK 109-509 A through C engines, or as monopropellant or power source with Z-Stoff for the HWK 109-500 Starthilfe RATO and HWK 109-507 ASM rocket booster pods
U-Stoff: dinitrogen tetroxide
X-Stoff: tetranitromethane
XU-Stoff: 70% (by weight) X-Stoff (tetranitromethane) / 30% (by weight) U-Stoff (dinitrogen tetroxide)
Z-Stoff: calcium permanganate / sodium permanganate / water
 
Soviets use to experiment with T and C stoff for a while after WW2 and gave up sometime in 1950s.There isn't much of a documentation left on it afaik as even Russian forums are usually full of "maybes" and theories.
 
607a3b135ec26b5b38a8bf844c0781e1.jpg


December 22, 1944 – Bastogne is surrounded, and the Germans demand the surrender of U.S. troops. The demand to surrender is rejected by Brig. Gen. Anthony C. McAuliffe, who reportedly replied: “Nuts!”
 
Dark Alley Dan said:
The experience gave the Americans a small taste of the three years of Ostfront the average German or Soviet soldier had to endure.

Fighting in the cold is pretty awful by all reports.
Click to expand...

Particularly when you aren't supplied any winter uniforms/coats. Funny that the Germans didn't have them either at the Ost front. At least the Americans got them after the Ardennes Offensive.
 
I served for two years at CFB Churchill where we had our arctic warfare school. We were told that at best a fighting force was only 60% efficient as 40% of your energy and resources were required to just staying alive. Once you started taking casualties due to cold and/or enemy action, that efficiency dropped exponentially.

We had the best arctic clothing in the world at the time and yet our survival time was rated at 45 minutes if we went down. I left Churchill convinced that hell is not hot - it's COLD!
 
Sharps '74 said:
I served for two years at CFB Churchill where we had our arctic warfare school. We were told that at best a fighting force was only 60% efficient as 40% of your energy and resources were required to just staying alive. Once you started taking casualties due to cold and/or enemy action, that efficiency dropped exponentially.

We had the best arctic clothing in the world at the time and yet our survival time was rated at 45 minutes if we went down. I left Churchill convinced that hell is not hot - it's COLD!
Click to expand...

Did you ever eat the parka buttons? .... chewy but flavourful. I recently ( a few weeks ago) met the son of the Ft Churchill camp RSM (Mr. McCracken) in the early '50's...it was an extraordinary co-incidence. At the time I always thought McCracken was the Base Commander...Mr McCracken was the only man in the Canadian Army that you could see his moustache when you stood behind him! Heavily waxed and twisted to dagger points..it was magnificent! He should have had burning candles attached to the ends! Maybe he did at night to terrify the soldiers for all I know.....but he sure struck fear in every body despite his short stature ...except maybe my father ..
 
Last edited:
AP said:
Did you ever eat the parka buttons? .... chewy but flavourful. I recently ( a few weeks ago) met the son of the Ft Churchill camp RSM (Mr. McCracken) in the early '50's...it was an extraordinary co-incidence. At the time I always thought McCracken was the Base Commander...Mr McCracken was the only man in the Canadian Army that you could see his moustache when you stood behind him! Heavily waxed and twisted to dagger points..it was magnificent! He should have had burning candles attached to the ends! Maybe he did at night to terrify the soldiers for all I know.....but he sure struck fear in every body despite his short stature ...except maybe my father ..
Click to expand...

Didn't know the buttons were edible.

Sounds like McCracken was the arch-typical RSM. Even the Officers are afraid of him! Why would a soldier prefer to appear before God and not the RSM? Because God would have mercy.
 
Sharps '74 said:
Didn't know the buttons were edible.

Sounds like McCracken was the arch-typical RSM. Even the Officers are afraid of him! Why would a soldier prefer to appear before God and not the RSM? Because God would have mercy.
Click to expand...

The old myth of edible buttons still lives. Only if you can eat plastic.
When I was in in the 60s and 70s, we used to wander around in the arctic. It was cold, dark and desolate. We always thought that if the Russians ever came over the top, let them have the arctic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom