ARP hear stud question
#22
so let me get this straight:
-you ask a question that has been discussed and easily found
-you tell everyone to spoon feed you the info cause you're too special to adhere to the rules everyone else does
-you call people out
-you conclude the thread with calling everyone a bs'er
Congrats. I don't think you coulda been more of a douche if you actually tried.
Listen guy, you've been up my *** since I've started this forum. I've done nothing but ask questions and all I get is **** from you and a select few others.
I don't care how many times a question has been asked and discussed or how many thread repeats I create. There is always someone new to input their thoughts. Novelty to a stale topic and that's what I look for when searching for answers on a forum.
It apparent so far that every newbie or junior member has positive input to my questions and most of the senior\elite I've encountered have bitterness and insults.
#24
This thread is now about SCUD
TL;DR
Take a German V2, make it simpler, put it on a truck, make a million of them
Scud is a series of tactical ballistic missiles developed by the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It was exported widely to other countries, in particular third world countries. The term comes from the NATO reporting name Scud which was attached to the missile by Western intelligence agencies. The Russian names for the missile are the R-11 (the first version), R-17 and R-300 Elbrus (later developments). The name Scud has been widely used to refer to these missiles and the wide variety of derivative variants developed in other countries based on the Soviet design.
(I've been to this museum when I was 6)
The first use of the term Scud was in the NATO name SS-1b Scud-A, applied to the R-11 ballistic missile. The earlier R-1 missile had carried the NATO name SS-1 Scunner, but was of a very different design, almost directly a copy of the German V-2. The R-11 used technology gained from the V-2 as well, but was a new design, smaller and differently shaped than the V-2 and R-1 weapons. The R-11 was developed by the Korolyev OKB[1] and entered service in 1957. The most revolutionary innovation in the R-11 was the engine, designed by A.M. Isaev. Far simpler than the V-2's multi-chamber design, and employing an anti-oscillation baffle to prevent chugging, it was a forerunner to the larger engines used in Soviet launch vehicles.
DAT ***
Further developed variants were the R-300 Elbrus / SS-1c Scud-B in 1961 and the SS-1d Scud-C in 1965, both of which could carry either a conventional high-explosive, a 5- to 80-kiloton nuclear, or a chemical (thickened VX) warhead. The SS-1e Scud-D variant developed in the 1980s can deliver a terminally guided warhead capable of greater precision.
All models are 11.35 m (37.2 ft) long (except Scud-A, which is 1 m (3 ft 3 in) shorter) and 0.88 m (2 ft 11 in) in diameter (DAT GIRTH). They are propelled by a single liquid-fuel rocket engine burning kerosene and corrosion inhibited red fuming nitric acid (IRFNA) with UDMH, unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (Russian TG-02 like German Tonka 250) as liquid igniter (self ignition with IRFNA) in all models.
The missile reaches a maximum speed of mach 5.
TL;DR
Take a German V2, make it simpler, put it on a truck, make a million of them
Scud is a series of tactical ballistic missiles developed by the Soviet Union during the Cold War. It was exported widely to other countries, in particular third world countries. The term comes from the NATO reporting name Scud which was attached to the missile by Western intelligence agencies. The Russian names for the missile are the R-11 (the first version), R-17 and R-300 Elbrus (later developments). The name Scud has been widely used to refer to these missiles and the wide variety of derivative variants developed in other countries based on the Soviet design.
(I've been to this museum when I was 6)
The first use of the term Scud was in the NATO name SS-1b Scud-A, applied to the R-11 ballistic missile. The earlier R-1 missile had carried the NATO name SS-1 Scunner, but was of a very different design, almost directly a copy of the German V-2. The R-11 used technology gained from the V-2 as well, but was a new design, smaller and differently shaped than the V-2 and R-1 weapons. The R-11 was developed by the Korolyev OKB[1] and entered service in 1957. The most revolutionary innovation in the R-11 was the engine, designed by A.M. Isaev. Far simpler than the V-2's multi-chamber design, and employing an anti-oscillation baffle to prevent chugging, it was a forerunner to the larger engines used in Soviet launch vehicles.
DAT ***
Further developed variants were the R-300 Elbrus / SS-1c Scud-B in 1961 and the SS-1d Scud-C in 1965, both of which could carry either a conventional high-explosive, a 5- to 80-kiloton nuclear, or a chemical (thickened VX) warhead. The SS-1e Scud-D variant developed in the 1980s can deliver a terminally guided warhead capable of greater precision.
All models are 11.35 m (37.2 ft) long (except Scud-A, which is 1 m (3 ft 3 in) shorter) and 0.88 m (2 ft 11 in) in diameter (DAT GIRTH). They are propelled by a single liquid-fuel rocket engine burning kerosene and corrosion inhibited red fuming nitric acid (IRFNA) with UDMH, unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (Russian TG-02 like German Tonka 250) as liquid igniter (self ignition with IRFNA) in all models.
The missile reaches a maximum speed of mach 5.
#25
Listen guy, you've been up my *** since I've started this forum. I've done nothing but ask questions and all I get is **** from you and a select few others.
I don't care how many times a question has been asked and discussed or how many thread repeats I create. There is always someone new to input their thoughts. Novelty to a stale topic and that's what I look for when searching for answers on a forum.
It apparent so far that every newbie or junior member has positive input to my questions and most of the senior\elite I've encountered have bitterness and insults.
I don't care how many times a question has been asked and discussed or how many thread repeats I create. There is always someone new to input their thoughts. Novelty to a stale topic and that's what I look for when searching for answers on a forum.
It apparent so far that every newbie or junior member has positive input to my questions and most of the senior\elite I've encountered have bitterness and insults.
Learn to search like the rest of the peasants
#28
Don't want to be special. I just don't have time to sit around and search through the 24 pages inside of the 2600 thread inside 9 topics, just to question who is full of **** and who knows what they're talking about.
A newbie member with 2 total posts maybe the best engine builder this site has ever seen and a member with .. Say, 18000 posts may be an incompetent tit with regurgitated information.
So numbers and member title mean nothing on any forum.
So far I've met 2 members I can trust and it's because I know their background and what they do.
A newbie member with 2 total posts maybe the best engine builder this site has ever seen and a member with .. Say, 18000 posts may be an incompetent tit with regurgitated information.
So numbers and member title mean nothing on any forum.
So far I've met 2 members I can trust and it's because I know their background and what they do.
Last edited by jandjracing_58; 08-16-2014 at 09:50 AM.
#29
Elite Member
iTrader: (37)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Very NorCal
Posts: 10,441
Total Cats: 1,899
As to who is full of ****, everyone is full of ****. This is the goddamn internet, are you new here? We already know who is full of **** and who knows what they are talking about because we don't just come here to mooch knowledge, we participate and engage in lively discussion on a daily basis. This is where the guys with the 1k+ post counts come from. Read and follow along and participate. Don't just barge in here, demand help and then get butthurt when we decide we don't want to spoon feed you. We have invested the time to be participating members here on the forum, why is it unacceptable for us to desire the same of you?
Also, dude... I'm not sure I would trust the word of a bunch of random dudes on the internet about torque specs for an engine build project without spending some significant time verifying that data.
#31
Great! I'm sure they warned you about this place too. Join the "community" here at MT and get to know some more people. I briefly searched back through your post history and discovered you are in the middle of naturally aspirated PTE type build that I'm sure a lot of people would love to read about. Go start a build thread and link it in your sig. Fill it with pics and tell us all about your plans. We will be much more likely to help you after we get to know you. It's not that hard, this isn't
You know, I think your right. I will compile a write up and post it.
Your also right about expecting answers, my apologies.. Sometimes I get too busy to take the time. I figured inside this forum there is some one with the knowledge on hand or knows it well.
#36
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,100
I torque ARP studs to 65ft.lbs.
#40
Elite Member
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Taos, New mexico
Posts: 6,613
Total Cats: 567
I sure as hell wouldn't "untorque" it now. Run it! I'm sure it's fine, although after what Sav said I think I'm going to be torquing mine to ~65/70 when i finally toss this motor together.