PDA

View Full Version : Pershing II Dimensions


jharding58
02-07-2011, 07:26 AM
This may be old news but I got the Technical Manual from the web for the Pershing II missile system. Included in the specifications (along with the assembly and launch layout and some really nice line drawings of the electrical and mechanical shop interiors) are the section lengths for the PII elements. That includes the two powered airframe sections, the G&C/Adapter section, Warhead, and Radar.

blackshire
02-08-2011, 02:20 AM
This may be old news but I got the Technical Manual from the web for the Pershing II missile system. Included in the specifications (along with the assembly and launch layout and some really nice line drawings of the electrical and mechanical shop interiors) are the section lengths for the PII elements. That includes the two powered airframe sections, the G&C/Adapter section, Warhead, and Radar.Thank you for posting this--I had not seen the individual Pershing II component dimensions (in either English or metric units, and this list has both) before!

MarkB.
02-08-2011, 06:28 PM
I will jump in here and say:

1) I recommend Sandman (Roachwerks) Pershing II with the cardstock detail , it is just beautiful. I started mine but didn't finish until I learned more about how to do the paper details

2) I wish Estes would come out with a Maxi-Brute 4" Pershing II; WAY cooler than a IA and a great way for the new Estes to put its own stamp on the product line.

jharding58
02-08-2011, 06:51 PM
No to get too far off topic but I have to admire his Nike Hercules. I built one of these and the customer waxed lyrical. I had to suck it up and admit that all I did was cut out the bits.

sandman
02-08-2011, 09:23 PM
What were we talking about?

Oh, yea, the Pershing II.

Well I never offered a Pershing II kit...I made some parts for a Pershing II but I really didn't think there would be much of a market for it.

I can make more.

BTW more NH kits available soon.

jharding58
02-08-2011, 10:14 PM
Well, I didn't think that you had kitted the P II - but we were on a roll.

MarkB.
02-09-2011, 08:39 AM
Well, I went back and looked and you're right, Sandman made me a furniture-grade nose cone assembly and the paper parts and I supplied the BT-80 tube, engine mount and recovery gear. I may go back and finish it now that I have alot more experience with cardstock.

sandman
02-09-2011, 10:37 AM
Well, I went back and looked and you're right, Sandman made me a furniture-grade nose cone assembly and the paper parts and I supplied the BT-80 tube, engine mount and recovery gear. I may go back and finish it now that I have alot more experience with cardstock.


IT'S NOT FINISHED!!!!

Where's my stick with nails in it? :mad:

BTW I have since made decals for it.

jharding58
02-09-2011, 03:49 PM
REceived this from Lockheed Martin. While reasonable it is still a little off from the true rendering of the original in that the fin shape on the booster is a little off (although I did find that the fin sockets could take either fin) and the radar section is not conic. On the othe rhand there are station numbers on page 2, and the P II RR is also shown. More to follow I hope.

MarkB.
02-09-2011, 04:21 PM
You know . . . .

Probably the only problem with Sandman's kits (and I'm not the only one who thinks so) is that you open this box with some of the most beautifully machined balsa parts you have ever laid eyes on and then you look over your most recent builds with warpped fins, balsa grain showing and runs in the paint and you think to yourself "I don't have game for this." and you set it aside because no person wants to be the one who marred such a thing of beauty.

No kidding, I have a Sandman Pershing IA, Soyuz and Nike Herc and as mentioned the parts for a Pershing II sitting next to my computer. These are the rockets I've always dreamed of building since I was a kid. And my first thought every time I've opened the box is "Oh God, please don't let me screw this one up." I've studied the build instructions and have practiced on less ambitious rockets the techniques of cardstock details and glue dot bolt-heads (with GREAT results on a Semroc IQSY and a Maxi-V2) and I think I'm ready to tackle the Pershings. I do know that I need much more practice before my Sandman Soyuz looks like Chan Stevens' Sandman Soyuz or jharding's Sandman Nike.

Heck, if you guys had seen some of the first few rockets I built after I came back, you probably would have taken Sandman's kits away from me . . . .

jharding58
02-09-2011, 04:36 PM
I think I just ran out of excuses.

If there is any interest I have the Pershing II Design Configuration document from April 1979. It is 6MB so posting is not possible, but if your email account can handle it and you want to know everything from the impact fuze configuration and RAM sensor to the tire pressure on the EL, then let me know. And you will be able to construct both the air burst and ground penetrator nose cones...

sandman
02-09-2011, 07:03 PM
You know . . . .

Probably the only problem with Sandman's kits (and I'm not the only one who thinks so) is that you open this box with some of the most beautifully machined balsa parts you have ever laid eyes on and then you look over your most recent builds with warpped fins, balsa grain showing and runs in the paint and you think to yourself "I don't have game for this." and you set it aside because no person wants to be the one who marred such a thing of beauty.

No kidding, I have a Sandman Pershing IA, Soyuz and Nike Herc and as mentioned the parts for a Pershing II sitting next to my computer. These are the rockets I've always dreamed of building since I was a kid. And my first thought every time I've opened the box is "Oh God, please don't let me screw this one up." I've studied the build instructions and have practiced on less ambitious rockets the techniques of cardstock details and glue dot bolt-heads (with GREAT results on a Semroc IQSY and a Maxi-V2) and I think I'm ready to tackle the Pershings. I do know that I need much more practice before my Sandman Soyuz looks like Chan Stevens' Sandman Soyuz or jharding's Sandman Nike.

Heck, if you guys had seen some of the first few rockets I built after I came back, you probably would have taken Sandman's kits away from me . . . .

Come on! Build them before I die.

I'm not getting any younger!

sandman
02-09-2011, 07:04 PM
I think I just ran out of excuses.

If there is any interest I have the Pershing II Design Configuration document from April 1979. It is 6MB so posting is not possible, but if your email account can handle it and you want to know everything from the impact fuze configuration and RAM sensor to the tire pressure on the EL, then let me know. And you will be able to construct both the air burst and ground penetrator nose cones...

You know my email.

Please, send it to me. :D

JumpJet
02-09-2011, 07:32 PM
I think if Estes ever does a Pershing it's going to be the Pershing 1A because it's WAY cooler the the Pershing II. At least I think so and that's what counts in my book.

John Boren
Estes R&D

MarkB.
02-09-2011, 08:22 PM
Hmmmm . . .

Sorry to hear that, John. There's no Pershing Ia inside at the Smithsonian or outside at White Sands so it can't be that cool.

But a Pershing Ia is colorful and I presume the mold for the nose still exists so it would be cheaper.

jharding58
02-09-2011, 09:46 PM
Not sure that the cool factor led to the display at NASM. P II was the missile system specifically named by the USSR in the INF treaty. Purely and simply they wanted it gone. The NASM display (which was an inert trainer) came about due to the exchange program with the Soviets - they got a P II, we got an SS-20. I think about 15 Pershing II were saved from destruction; the casings were cleared and the warheads transferred into shapes for the Air Force.
P 1 and 1a were effective weapons in a tactical battlefield scenario but the P II scared the hell out of them Reds. When you go to the Missile Park at White Sands read the plaque for the Pershing II. Paraphrased it states that a Pershing II fired from Boise Idaho could accurately strike a target the size of the park in which you are standing - about a 200 foot CP

Ltvscout
02-10-2011, 08:06 AM
I think if Estes ever does a Pershing it's going to be the Pershing 1A because it's WAY cooler the the Pershing II. At least I think so and that's what counts in my book.
I agree!

wilsotr
02-10-2011, 11:34 AM
Probably the only problem with Sandman's kits (and I'm not the only one who thinks so) is that you open this box with some of the most beautifully machined balsa parts you have ever laid eyes on . . . .

Sandman's kits are themselves works of art .... there's really no reason to build them. :)

jharding58
02-10-2011, 02:56 PM
I believe tht I have provided all who asked with a copy of the Design Specification document. aIf you submitted a PM or email request and did not receive the documents please let me know.