Talk:Wernher von Braun

Birth Place

Wirsitz was not "occupied by Germany 1772-1918". It became a part of Prussia and later, 1871, of the German Empire. What the author seems to understand with "Germany", did not exist in 1772 anyway.--87.178.71.1 (talk) 13:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Website Vandalism Notice

er... I just deleted some vandal's graffiti...hope it is alright with ye... --Nathan Zhang —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.112.196.93 (talk) 01:32, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I just reverted some vandalism as well. --Queenrani (talk) 05:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Posthumous Honors

The Von Braun Civic Center was built in 1975, and Braun died in 1977, how is the honors posthumous?

Family name and title Freiherr/Freiherrin

The legal significance of noble titles in Germany and Austria was ended at the conclusion of the first World War. It had also been the tradition that in a German noble family, all sons inherit the title, and all their sons, and so forth. Following the abolition of such titles, they were permitted to state the title and name, e.g. Freiherr von Braun as a full legal name, but the Freiherr has simply become part of the name. Strictly speaking, female family members by law should call themselves Freiherr von Braun as well, but it is customary for them to feminize the title, for those who care to use it, and nobody bothers much about it.

I believe some sort of footnote or comment should be added to clarify that his family likely didn't possess a palace full of liveried servants, nor a stereotypical castle overlooking a river. The proliferation of German Freiherren would have ensured that.

(talk) 03:56, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Early Life

I doubt that Wernher von Braun got a Bachelor of Science degree. At that time, there were no Bachelor degrees in Germany, just Masters and PhDs. So either he got a Master's or no degree. -- An Austrian

Arthur Rudolph stated he received a eiwergreifen (the term has phonetic beside it- I am sure the spelling is suspect) in Mechanical Engineering, and that this was equivalent to a BS. A 1962 security investiation form shows BS - ME from College of Berlin in 1930. I'm sure this would have been the Technical College of Berlin as it was known then. --Gadget850 15:00, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

BTW, if someone figures this out, I am curious to know. --Gadget850 14:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

According to the German Wikipedia, von Braun completed an Abitur at the Hermann-Lietz-Schule in Spiekeroog in 1930, the basic qualification that enables one to enter a university--roughly the equivalent of British A-levels , American high school diploma or French baccalauréat. This French use--or its growing internationalization--may have contributed to a belief by some that he had a "bachelor's" (In the 1930's in Germany apparently only Law schools still used a "bachelor's degree.")

Ziusudra 20:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Urban legend?

I tried to add this true story about Von Braun, but it seems it doesn't get immediate approval:

«Because of the destructions caused by his V2's, Von Braun has been considered a long time as a war criminal in Britain. One day, as Von Braun was coming back from a trip in Europe in a US plane, he felt the plane go down. He was then informed by the crew that the plane was about to land in Britain for refueling. He explained his status to the pilot, who aborted the landing. Soon after this incident, US diplomats worked to remove Von Braun's war criminal status in Europe.»

Who objects to this addition ? --Anonymous

I do not, but apparently Guanaco does. I might have edited it a bit for NPOV and perhaps put it in a less conspicuous place than a ==War criminal== heading, particularly because he's regarded much more as a hero of the space program in Huntsville, Alabama and the United States.

Thanks. I have added the story as part of his NASA career, and added the hero status for fairness. --Anonymous

«As a figure of the space exploration program, Von Braun got to travel across the world. One day, as he was coming back from a trip in Europe in a US plane, he felt the plane go down. He was then informed by the crew that the plane was about to land in Britain for refueling. Because of the destructions caused by his V2's, Von Braun was still considered a war criminal in Britain at the time. He explained his status to the pilot, who aborted the landing. Soon after this incident, US diplomats worked to remove Von Braun's war criminal status in Europe. He's regarded as a hero of the space program in Huntsville, Alabama and the United States.»

Von Braun was instrumental in the bombing of england which almost led to the defeat of the allies.Then how could England grant him asylum.

I've taken it out again until some credible sources and references are provided, this has the feel of an urban legend.--GeneralPatton 13:50, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC) In fact in 1945 the British offered him full support for continuation of his work, but he turned them down and instead decided to work for the USA, whom he felt had the greatest resources to pull off a space program. He and his associates even spent some time in Britain during 1945, especially Dornberger!--GeneralPatton 13:56, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Countries can have a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde approach to dealing with smart people who helped the enemy. The United States brought rocket scientist Arthur Rudolph to the country from Germany as part of Project Paperclip, had him design the Saturn V, then essentially kicked him out of the country (then Canada kicked him out) because of his participation at Peenemünde. -- ke4roh 16:12, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Arthur Rudolph's problems primarily came from the allegations that he personally mistreated and sadistically abused slave laborers, that he was a staunch anti-semite even in the US and stayed an unrepentant neo-nazi until the end. --GeneralPatton 01:21, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Let's see: when was he granted immunity, and when did he travel to Europe before that ? If he did, did he ever land in Britain ? --Anonymous

a. Sign what you write, b. I still see no credible sources and references. --GeneralPatton 01:40, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Perhaps the FBI dossier can substantiate the claim. Since it's big, I recommend we split it up and loook at it in sections. -- ke4roh 16:38, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC)

• Reviewers of sections:
  • § 4 - mostly about nutty fan mail, no mention of travel - ke4roh
  • § 5 - more kooks, and on p. 48 (continued in §6) an interesting story "Translation and Abstracts of The Secret of Huntsville: The True Career of the Rocket Baron Wehrner von Braun by Julius Mader, reprented in Forum, East Berlin Newspaper for Students and the Young Intelligencia, Nos 36/49, Vol. 16, 1962. Copyright by Kongress Publishing Co, 1962." Aside from its wild propaganda about Sheik von Braun and his exploits of the poor Huntsvillians, it starts off with a decent description of Huntsville in 1962. -- ke4roh
  • § 6 - Mader purportedly quotes von Braun: "I believe my school education was useless. I attended the French Gymnasium in Berlin where only French was spoken .... My weakness was in the field of mathematics. But I flunked not only in mathematics, but also in physics." He says the quote is from a West Berlin Newspaper: Spandauer, September 17, 1959. For some perspective, Mader writes §6 p. 45 "The von Brauns, representitives of the imperialistic ruling class, were unable to change the outcome of the first and second world war, they neither succeeded with treachery and intrigue nor war rockets. They were unable to stop the lawful evolution of mankind towards socialism and are now completely unable to stop this trend even by American nuclear weapons. They are marching along the losers' road of history, chased by the the scorn of peoples whom they injured or decimated." Most of § 6 is Mader's writing. - ke4roh
  • § 7 - p. 28: Golos Rodiny (Voice of the Homeland) No. 12 (411) February 1960 reports on Von Braun's testimony before a congressional committee (translated from English to Russian and back): WvB said he "'would not be surprised' if this year the Russians would place a man in orbit around the earth. ... von Braun 'doubts very much' that the United States could overtake [the Soviet Union] by 1964, even taking into consideration new funds allotted for a big space rocket 'Saturn'." - ke4roh

The whole article is biased. No real mention of war criminal allegations. Type "Von Braun war criminal" in Google and see by yourself. I don't care whether the allegations are true or not, the debate is significant enough to be mentionned directly in this article. Also, where is the quote about French slaves coming from ? --Anonymous

Why don't you identify yourself, it seems to me that you are a persistent troll. FBI file does not mention any of your allegations. Even the communist controlled East German press didn’t accuse him of the allegations you write. Please state your agenda, the statement "don't care whether the allegations are true or not" shows you do have one. --GeneralPatton 12:37, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I Googled "Wernher von Braun" "war criminal" and got 333 results, many discussing Von Braun in conjunction with others who faced more serious charges like Arthur Rudolph. The most notable result I found was ISBN 0275962172, Wernher von Braun: The Man Who Sold the Moon by Dennis Piszkiewicz. I have not read the book, though I might. Amazon reviewers had mixed takes on it, many charging the author with bias or vendetta. Other pages alluded to his potential to be a war criminal but did not give specifics. -- ke4roh 14:55, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

Well, Google "Bill Clinton" "war criminal" and you'll get 12,200 hits. But allegations are just that, allegations, especially since von Braun was constantly heavily scrutinized due to his prominence both before and after the war, but no serious evidence was ever produced, if there was anything serious, the East German STASI or the media would have dug it up, but they didn't. We might as well include the infamous “Clinton hit list” in wiki then if we’re going to cover dubious allegations. --GeneralPatton 02:08, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

In fact, "Ronald Reagan" "war criminal" gives me 7,120 hits, "Winston Churchill" "war criminal" 2,310 hits, "Harry Truman" "war criminal" 1,510 hits, "Kennedy" "war criminal" 10,900 hits, "Kissinger" "war criminal" 11,300 hits, "Nixon" "war criminal" 8,840 hits, "Ariel Sharon" "war criminal" 16,400 hits, "Wesley Clark" "war criminal" 5,340 hits, "Colin Powell" "war criminal" 9,000 hits, "Rumsfeld" "war criminal" 18,300 hits, "John Kerry" "war criminal" 9,720 hits, and "Bush" "war criminal" gives me the whooping 70,200 hits, even the "pope" "war criminal" gives 8,410 hits on Google.--GeneralPatton 02:22, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thank god Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not american propaganda. He is a regarded as a war criminal, sorry to bring the bad news, General Patton. --Anonymous

Would you please identify yourself? And then give some attribution. The Germans are supersensitive about WW2 yet they still regard him as a great hero.--GeneralPatton 03:25, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I was in school in Germany; and German history classes don't mention Wernher v.Braun the hero, but inclued WvB the war criminal!!!

Considering your level of language (ref. "troll"), I don't think any fair amount of discussion will help you understand the NPOV concept, and have it applied to this case. I suggest the article to be frozen until unbiaised Wikipedia administrators decide which way to go. --Anonymous

I am German and I am pretty sure that there are very few Germans that regard Wernher von Braun as a hero. I also think that this article is biased, it might be helpful to include some of the information from the German Wikipedia. E.g. in my opinion it should be mentioned that there were forced laborers at Peenemuende and that Wernher von Braun actually requested more of them so he must have been aware of that fact. It might be true that he had to join NSDAP and SS in order to keep working however he knew he was working on a weapon (that’s what the nazi regime paid him for) and he could have decided not to develop it in the first place. However, he collaborated as long as he could carry on with his research. I believe that he is the perfect example of a scientist that does not care about moral obligations at all but that is only interested in his work.R.C.B. 09:22, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Just as a reminder, here is two of the policies we have to follow as part of Wikipedia:

• First, because there are a huge variety of participants of all ideologies and nationalities Wikipedia is committed to making its articles as unbiased as possible. There has been criticism that the systemic bias of individual participants can color the neutrality of an article. However, the aim is not to write articles from a single objective point of view — this is a common misunderstanding of the policy — but rather, to fairly present all views on an issue, attributed to their adherents in a neutral way. Of course, establishing a consensus on what views should be thus attributed can often require much (sometimes heated) discussion and debate.
• Avoid profanity (words or images that could be considered offensive by typical Wikipedia readers), but not at the expense of accuracy. We strive to create a serious encyclopedia with brilliant prose.

Sbossineau

Sbossineau, well, i see you are new here, this being your first and only post thus far, so welcome.--GeneralPatton 22:05, 10 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The SS was declared a criminal organisation, so as a member surely von Braun is a crinimal? I'm not in full possession of the facts, but the BBC Two television programme "Space Race" seemed convinced von Braun was fully aware of the slave labour used.

This surely should be mentioned in the full article.

ChrisL

Declared criminal by whom? Does that mean every SS member (and there were hundreds of thousands, many of them non-German) was a war criminal?

  YES!!!

So is the war criminal accusation related to (a) what VB did during the war (develop indiscriminate war weapons) (b) the use of slave labour

(a) Were the scientists on the Manhattan Project war criminals, since they knowingly developed a weapon whose primary function is to destroy cities and kill inhabitants regardless of status? The V1 and V2 weapons were clearly indiscriminate weapons of this type, if far less powerful.

(b) If the latter - is use of slave labour a war crime? In most wars in history, prisoners of war have been used to perform manual labour for their captors. This happened on both sides in WW2. It is allowed by the Geneva convention - as long as the prisoners are treated humanely. We like to think that German POWs were treated rather better in WW2 than Allied ones - but I doubt if this applies to Germans unlucky enough to be captured by the Soviets. VB used political prisoners and others including Jews to build his rockets.

The nub of the matter is, I think, the inhumane treatment of these workers involved in the construction of the rockets. How much was VB responsible for this? Knowing what he did should he have refused to work unless conditions were improved? Perhaps. But is his failure to do so enough to make him a war criminal?

There is always the "I was only obeying orders" defence. Less convincing the more senior the defendant is. VB was clearly important to the Nazis and had influence - not unlimited of course, as shown by his arrest. Hitler was quite willing to kill even his most trusted followers if they turned against him. Rommell, for example.

There is no "I was only obeying orders" defence in the UK and many other European countries.Drg40 (talk) 20:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

(personal viewpoint) - VB was probably one of that type of scientist whose interest in his work overrides other considerations. Not exactly uncommon. But a war criminal? Probably not. Exile 15:42, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

being a member of a (war) criminal organisation (SS) makes you a criminal (according to German law)

Compromise re: Oppenheimer

I am satisfied with the latest edits from General Patton. Thanks ! 66.25.49.10

Great then, well, if only the people at Robert Oppenheimer would feel the same as i do. Personally I do agree that wiki is not Hero worship, but we really need to sort out the facts and present it with the least POV possible. I always seek a compromise, always.--GeneralPatton 01:29, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

If you want to talk about the ethical ambiguity and opinons towards von Braun, do it IN THE ARTICLE. The first paragraph is supposed to just be a BRIEF summary. Oppenheimer does not belong in von Braun's brief summary -- he has nothing to do with him in the slightest. --Fastfission 17:46, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well, I agree with you, but does user 66.25.49.10 who's been insisting on it agree? --GeneralPatton 21:33, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I agree with Fastfission 100%. The jab at Oppenheimer is out of place and not at all NPOV. --mav 21:21, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Plagiarism?

This article has a few paragraphs word-for-word which are also found at http://liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov/academy/history/VonBraun/Germany.html. I don't know Wikipedias stance on plagiarism (or which way this incident went). However there has definately been some copying.

Because the text at liftoff.msfc.nasa.gov is a work of the United States government, it is in the public domain worldwide. Copying is thus permitted. -- ke4roh 03:28, Jul 10, 2004 (UTC)

I was the one that originally copied the text from MSFC. I did it because it was a good public domain source, but it does have some serious POV problems (i.e. it tends to play down the war crime charges) which I'm glad to see that people are fixing. Roadrunner 18:12, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Just because something is in the public domain, and therefore can be copied, does not mean you can use it without a citation. You may not have stolen it, but you did indeed plagiarize it. 76.209.59.179 (talk) 18:11, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

COrrect. Plagiarism is not the same as copyright violation. If text is copied, it needs to be quoted or cited. 24.16.88.14 (talk) 12:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Nothing will be done by Wikipedia. Only the sources we used are going to complain about it. 173.183.66.173 (talk) 00:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

New Biography

I have this eveving spoken with an author whom has written a new work on von Braun which will, I believe, treat von Braun's life evenhandedly, rather than being a glowing report or a damning indictment. The author has spoken with several first-hand resources, and has read deeply and widely on von Braun, and resides in the Huntsville, AL community. Upon it's publication in early 2005, I will cite it as a reference and draw upon it as an authoritative voice in von Braun's life. K. L. Bardon 00:02, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

>evenhandedly...

The issue is not the POV, the issue is about distortion of the facts.

As mentioned above, the original article was "playing down" the question of war crimes. At times not telling the truth (claiming he wore the SS uniform only once). Not telling the whole truth (like not bringing the next sentence in the book where a fellow officer tells about him wearing it frequently, or mentioning the slave workers). And bringing extra facts besides the truth (I'm talking about the original article, suggesting time and again, out of context, that von Braun was completely innocent of any knowledge about the targets of his rockets, or of the fate and conditions in which his slave workers where kept. If you are so intent on clearing him, bring down the facts, then argue with them.

I find it hard to believe this book will treat him "evenhandedly". Mr. Space also treats him evenhandedly, and brings all the evidence, but somehow you get the uneasy feeling from a pile of evidence that the book is assisting a cover up.

Is there controversy over the SS being criminal, like someone "innocently" asked above? - (boy did I laugh when I saw that "YES!")

More importantly, could whitewashing the SS actions of murder not be considered profanity, under some condition?

I'm asking this directly on this article. פשוט pashute ♫ (talk) 12:22, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Additional information

This was added by user:Kevin L. Bardon on December 19. It needs a copyedit at the very least and seems to be not NPOV.Evil Monkey → Talk 05:10, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)

Additional information

An OMGUS (Office of the Military Governor - United States ) document dated April 23, 1947 states that von Braun joined the SS horseback riding school in fall 1933, that he joined the Nazi party May 1, 1937 and that he held four ranks in the SS from may 1940 to June 28, 1943 when he was awarded the highest rank of Sturmbannfuerer (SS Major). Von Braun's comments on those memberships was "I was officially demanded to join the National Socialist Party. At this time (l937) I was already technical director of the Army Rocket Center at Peenemuende... My refusal to join the party would have meant that I would have to abandon the work of my life. Therefore, I decided to join. My membership in the party did not involve any political activities...in spring l940, one SS-Standartenfuerer (SS Colonel) Mueller... looked me up in my office at Peenemuende and told me, that Reichsfuehrer SS Himmler had sent him with the order to urge me to join the SS. I called immediately on my military superior... Major-General Dr. Dornbeger. He informed me that...if I wanted to continue our mutual work, I had no alternative but to join." (The reader must bear in mind von Braun's comments were made after he had been brought to the United States.)

There exists no documentation or record, public or private, that von Braun directly repudiated and/or disavowed Nazism or expressed any regret for his participation. The closest he ever came to such was in l965, when a group that named itself the Amicale des Camps de Dora Ellrich (Friends of Deportees of the Dora-Ellrich Camps) accused von Braun of being partly responsible for the suffering of inmates of the concentration camp where the V-2 was built. The French magazine Paris Match asked von Braun to answer his accusers. Von Braun replied on April 26, l966: "As much as I understand their bitterness, I am appalled by their false accusations aimed at me." He went on to explain that the U.S. government had cleared him, how a war crimes tribunal had investigated the atrocities at Dora, that neither investigation had found anything that adversely reflected on him. About the crimes at Dora, he wrote: "I felt ashamed that things like this were possible in Germany, even under a war situation where national survival was at stake".

There are three different versions of von Braun's arrest. André Sellier, a survivor of Mittelbau-Dora Concentration Camp and a French historian, offers as good an explanation as any. It is summarized as follows: Himmler called WvB, whom was already a SS officer, to come to his Hochwald HQ in east Prussia sometime February 1944. Himmler recommended WvB work more closely with Krammer to solve the problems of the V-2. WvB claimed to have replied that the problems were merely technical and he was confident that Dornberger would help him. WvB had apparently been under surveillance since October by the SD, which was creating a report on he and his colleagues Riedel and Grotrupp. They were said to have expressed regret at an engineer's house one evening they were not working on a spaceship, and that they had the feeling that the war was not going well. A young and very attractive female dentist denounced them for their comments. WvB was arrested and on February 22 taken to Stettin, where he was imprisoned for two weeks, not knowing the charges leveled against him. Only through the Abwehr in Berlin that Dornberger was able to obtain WvB's conditional release. Speer also apparently intervened on their behalf as well.

A hero in the US?

Is it certain that von Braun is really regarded as a hero in the US? I was born in the US in 1963, and I think he was a Nazi pig. No contributions to the US space program could possibly make up for the deaths of the slave laborers producing his V2 rockets during WW2. Is the unqualified statement in the intro paragraph really warranted?--165.189.91.148 21:54, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The term "slave laborers" is unapropriate, since the Germans didn't purchase any slave to work for them. However prisoners can be seen as forced labor and there was concsript labor and of course contracted labor as well.--41.244.9.37 (talk) 19:45, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

"...and I think he was...". Well, what you personally might think of the subject in question (applying to any Wikipedia article) is perhaps not the information one should base an encyclopedia on. As for von Braun's status in the US, the contemporary feelings for him in the general population was definitely positive--in the media of the time he was presented as the archetypal "rocket scientist", responsible for keeping the US space program abreast of the Soviet counterpart. The negatively laden information about his role in Nazi Germany's V2 rocket project was played down by the US Govt during the 1950s and 60s, and didn't seriously surface in the media until the early 70s. --Wernher 12:00, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• • Yes, information about the Nazi crimes at Dora didn't come out until much later, but the article doesn't say "he was regarded as a hero" , it says he is regarded as a hero. Is that accurate? Quale 20:41, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, I don't know about being considered a hero, but I have heard him refered to as the "Father of the American Space Program", or something like that. But a statement like that definitely needs a citation. --Queenrani (talk) 05:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The thing is, the way they teach it in American schools is that he was a scientist and didn't care about politics. They whitewash his image very aggressively and I had almost no idea about his crimes and alleged activities until I came to this website. I was taught that he was a hero at a Georgia public school...so inferences can be made (if not included in the article) 59.38.32.9 (talk) 01:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

He's certainly viewed differently in Britain, where he's remembered as a Nazi scientist and borderline war criminal who was directly responsible for tens of thousands of civilian deaths in London and Antwerp. Perhaps if his planned 'New York Rocket' had destroyed large parts of the US eastern seaboard the US attitude would be a bit less positive. --Ef80 (talk) 18:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, what about Bomber Harris who flattened German cities, in some cases (like Dresden) for no reason appropriate to the war effort at that stage? Indeed Churchill seems to have been big on revenge of that nature due to the destruction of English cities such as Coventry. You've got statues to both men in the UK. Are they war criminals too? But some of this stuff here seems to be posted by Germans, who have swung so far the other way, to perpetual hand-wringing sorrow and whining self-loathing shame, they can't see the situation that some of those men were in. It is fine to talk bravely in modern Germany. I suspect if von Braun hadn't done what he was supposed to do, he'd have got a bullet in the head. From what I read, the Nazis didn't take "no" for an answer. It is easy to talk courageously about morality when you aren't the one in that position. You can look at the old Nazi reels on Youtube, and it seems to me that there are a lot of German citizens who had their arms up in salute quite happily. Von Braun had lots of company and from the vast the majority of his countrymen, who now like to find scapegoats for their collective guilt. Anyway, the US struck a deal with von Braun after the war, and he redeemed himself by keeping his part of the bargain. I don't care if he ran a full concentration camp in his Nazi days. He was of immeasurable help in in the Cold War. That's the way the real world works. If they didn't want his help, they should have hanged him in 1945. Timmy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.34.225.122 (talk) 00:45, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

What exactly have Harris and Churchill to do with Von Braun? What about Harry S. Truman, who used nuclear weapons on undefended cities? This is all beside the point. FWIW, Harris is widely regarded as a borderline war criminal in Britain, particularly by postwar generations, and the bombing of Dresden is a matter of national shame, though understandable in its context. --Ef80 (talk) 21:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, we should not claim he's considered a national hero, as that breaks our NPOV standards disgracefully, although it wouldn't hurt mentioning public schools' disregard to his Nazi contributions. 173.183.66.173 (talk) 00:56, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Antarctica

There is a gap in the article. It leaves out the time of the moon landing and his time in Antarctica. Why is that? Is there no info? It seems a very important point in his biography. Ben (talk) 11:49, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

Confusion in dates

The surrender paragraph follows after the arrest paragraph, but the arrest appears to have

taken place in 1944 and the surrender surely was in 1945(?). But the surrender paragraph implies that the surrender took place immediately after release from a 2 week captivity. Can someone please clear that up?

Category sorting

The constant changing of the category sorting on this article has prompted me to raise the issue at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Category sorting as it appears that currently there is no guideline in Wikipedia for this issue. Evil Monkey∴Hello 08:54, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Common sense would be the easiest guideline. Where are people going to find him the easiest? Maybe less than 1% would look first under the B's. Of the 99% who'd look first under V, maybe only 10% would think to look under B if they didn't find him under V. In a short list, they might find him by accident. Just look at this talk page; when he is referred to by surname only, it is always "von Braun" and never "Braun" alone. Gene Nygaard 10:57, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I'm afraid the 'common sense' refrered to above is somewhat subjective (read: Anglo(?)-American)... Your argument/observations on the eyeball search-behavior of many readers may be quite correct, however, and so I wonder whether we should let the majority(?) of readers go on with their erroneous(?) alphabetic search ordering in this and similar cases, or whether we should make a correction/educational effort by, e.g., making dummy articles like "Von Braun, Wernher, see Braun, Wernher von", categorized under 'V'. Or, more generally, just include an article "Von X-type names, see X" into affected categories. (By all means please suggest better solutions; these are just illustrative.)

As for the surname referral fact, that does not influence the alphasort issue. Yes, he is referred to as 'Von Braun', but, still, 'von'-based names are correctly sorted under their respective 'main names'. In countries where many people have such names it doesn't make much sense to have them all piled up under 'V' (German-speaking countries, the Netherlands, and more).

Nevertheless, if the sorting practice (and perhaps even grammatical sorting rule) in English is of the type you argue for (and that may indeed be the right one; I myself haven't looked into the details), we might do the opposite of my abovementioned suggestions, and rather put in a 'B'-sorted article "Braun, Wernher von; see Von Braun, Wernher" (i.e. main article sorted under 'V'). --Wernher 02:38, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

German people are not sorted by predicates. His family name is Braun, "von" is the predicate. And yes, common sense would be the easiest guideline. Everyone perhaps except Mr. Nygaard would look under "Braun" and not even think that someone has been so stubborn ignorant that they have sorted him under "von". (I also don't believe that Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is indexed as "of the United Kingdom, Elizabeth II".) --Anonymous

Quoting from above: << making dummy articles like "Von Braun, Wernher, see Braun, Wernher von", >> Yes, at the very least, this must be done if he is to be alphabetized under B. German usage has no bearing, in my judgment: he spent half his life (and most of his professional life) in the U.S., and he was an American citizen. The Library of Congress online catalog returns 18 books if you look for VON BRAUN, WERNHER, but none if you omit the VON or move it after the BRAUN or the WERNHER. Cubdriver

This is rubbish. He was a prominent researcher in Germany. Where he lived later in his carrier is irrelevant. He was German. The Germans are one of the ethnic groups living in America (originally Indian territory). Since he was German and not English, German usage must be followed.

Nonsense, whoever you are. When he moved, the nature of his name changed. He never was indexed in any English-language phone book under B, he is not indexed under B in the Social Security Death Index, he is not indexed under B in the Library of Congress Card Catalog.

Compare the rules for naming articles, where the rule is how the person is best known in English.

Furthermore, as was pointed out in the village pump discussion, the Chicago Manual of Style uses uses him as an example. [1] Gene Nygaard 08:02, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

replacement link as the one referenced above is no longer valid: Chicago Manual of Style sez (Courtland 01:39, 12 November 2005 (UTC))

German-American?

I don't think so.

Von Braun was a german. He was naturalised later, but calling him a 'german-american' suggest he was so all his life.Robrecht 13:19, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. It would be justified, if he had grown up in the US. But he came to the US as an adult only. Any attribution of him to America is utter nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.244.9.37 (talk) 19:39, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I do think so.

He was an American citizen, and by the standards Wikipedia sets for such designations the accurate, factual description is 'German - American'.

I am amazed at the level of ignorance displayed here. He would not have to "grow up here" to be considered German - American, his citizenship would be sufficient, and that is how the definition would be established.

That someone's personal opinion is that this is "utter nonsense" and that someone else agrees means nothing. Facts, not personal opinions, or views determine the content here.(75.69.241.91 (talk) 08:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC))

I disagree. He was German (by ethnicity) and that is a fact. He solely moved to America after the war and started to work there after he was already considered as the leading scientist in rocket tehnology. He was only an American citizen - from 1955 until his death in 1977 (as he was German citizen as well his whole life). We are talking about nationality (ethnicity) not citizenship. If the Soviets would get to him first and he would work in their space programme, would that make him Soviet/Russian on the Wiki article? Probably not. (I live in Slovenia and have an aditiional citizenship of another country, while I also have the right to obtain citizenship of two other countries. What does that make me?)Ratipok (talk) 17:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

He himself applied for US citizenship, and it was granted. That's all the information we need. Your political opinion is not relevant to the article. Martijn Meijering (talk) 20:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

He didnt just have the American citizenship, but also German one (when he received the American citizenship he became dual citizen of Germany and USA). And its not a political opinion, its logic. If you are born in Germany to a German family while living most of your life there, your German. And I will ask you again. If the Soviets/Russians would got to him first after the war, would he now be labeled as Soviet/Russian rocket scientist on Wiki?Ratipok (talk) 09:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

"von Braun" pronunciation

Is it "von Brawn" or "von Brown"? ✈ James C. 02:58, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Most probably the pronunciation will be the same as the electric appliance company, Braun[2], which is pronounced as BROWN.

Also see http://german.about.com/library/weekly/aa020401b.htm for more on proper pronunciation of German words.

It's easy to remember because of Tom Lehrer's song, which includes the lines:

Call him a Nazi, he won't even frown,

"Ah, Nazi schmatzi," says Wernher von Braun.

—Josiah Rowe 03:42, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

No, the German "Braun" is neither pronounced like "Brawn" nor "Brown"

Well, I pronounce his name as "Verner Von BRAWN". I pronounce the "von" with "phlegm" Montgomery' 39 (talk) 16:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

V-1 and von Braun

The main article incorrectly states that von Braun led the development of the V-1.... This is a common mistake made by people who still think that V-1 and V-2 are just two different versions of the same weapon.

V-2 was a true rocket and a child of von Braun but V-1 was not a rocket at all. These two weapons have almost nothing in common (the V-1 was the world's first cruise missile and was powered by a primitive pulse jet engine [3] whereas the V-2 was a rocket propelled ballistic missile). Wernher von Braun was a first class rocket scientist and an engineer, never involved in plane design of any kind. At the same time, his team had nothing in common with the Luftwaffe generals who stood firmly behind the V-1 project. For most of the war the two projects run in parallel with almost no interference (if any).

--saxon64 13:42, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Von Braun never developed the V-1, nor was he involved. The V-1 was built by the Fieseler company, NOT by Von Braun. Montgomery' 39 (talk) 16:09, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Nasa Career- Carol Rosin

The section on Dr. Carol Rosin seems gratuitous. I also just did a ProQuest search and I couldn't find any joint work by Dr. Rosin and Dr. von Braun. Can it be substantiated?

I've done an extensive search by myself, and the only mainstream reference i could find about Carol Rosin was over at CNN [4] [5] that linked her to one Timothy Leary. GeneralPatton 07:17, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Mittelbau-Dora Concentration Camp

The Canadian documentary series "Turning Points of History" on History Television makes extensive references to the Mittelbau-Dora Concentration Camp in their biography of Wernher von Braun. This is by far the most accurate television documentary on his Nazi career in North America.

I believe more on the camp should be mentioned in this article to reflect his character. His job at NASA is talked about, why shouldn't more on his job at a concentration camp be written into this page (without being removed or edited by those that think of him as some sort of a hero)?

It is amazing (and revolting) that a man who built weapons to kill British and Dutch civilians using Jewish, Soviet, and French slave labour should come out smelling like roses in America and be worshipped as a hero. Let’s also not forget his contribution to nuclear weapons development, fallout from such tests (high altitude explosions lifted by his rockets) have caused cancer to numerous people in the South Pacific and American civilians and military personnel.

I can’t say I was surprised though to see the footage of him with Kennedy riding in a convertible with a marching band draped in Confederate flags marching through the streets of Alabama. --RPlunk 17:40, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Did he ask for slave labor? Was he in charge of how the rockets would be used? Yes, I'm sure he did do some evil while in Germany, which makes his hero status all the more amazing, but he was not entirely responsible for this evil. Captain Jackson 05:19, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, he did ask for slave labor, he once personally ordered 1350 labor slaves per telegram. Many survivors of Dora-Mittelbau have confirmed that he visited the KZ frequently, von Braun has always denied it, as much as he denied that he visited any KZ, until a letter from 1944 proved that von Braun not only visited the KZ Buchenwald, one of the most unhuman Germans KZs, but that he personally picked labor slaves from that KZ. That letter was written by von Braun himself. Von Braun also denied in his autobiography that he ever wore the SS uniform; a photography that was published after his death, showing him in full SS uniform next to Himmler proved that claim wrong too. Braun has always denied - and very often lied - about his intense connections and collaboration with the Nazi regime, and only admitted facts after they were proven beyond any doubt.

Somebody who personally picks labor slaves, orders labor slaves, causes the death of at least 10 thousand labor slaves through his work,

But this is the crux. He was not in charge, so far as is known over any of the conditions that lead to the death of the slaves.WolfKeeper 05:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

He was not directly responsible for the conditions, absolutely true. But he was well aware of these conditions, he accepted these conditions and he ordered labor slaves into these conditions. He didn't create the conditions himself but used the given - deadly and unhuman - conditions for his own purpose.

who develops a weapon (V-2) while fully aware of the fact that it will kill civilians only (5000-6000),

It was WWII. Were the British and American people who firebombed the German cities ever convicted of war crimes? You need to consider context. Also, you need to consider that if he had gone around saying: "shouldn't you be nicer to these people?" He would have been branded a Communist sympathiser and shot. In the absence of evidence that he actually made conditions for these people worse I guess we have to give him the benefit of the doubt.WolfKeeper 05:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

No, Americans and Brits weren't convicted: Winners justice. But the development of weapons that would kill civilians is not one of the main charges against vB. And "The shouldn't you treat the labor slaves nicer" wouldn't have gotten him shot. It is only a claim in self-defense many former Nazis used on many difficult opportunities - like the infamous "I was forced into the NSDAP, SS, whatever - but I was never a Nazi". vB never even tried to improve the conditions of the labor slaves, although one could imagine many different attempts to do so - provided one wanted to improve these conditions - particularly of a high-ranking, highly decorated SS officer.--Twiw 17:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

For example, the Bombing of Hamburg in World War II- in one night 40,000 people died from a firestorm in 1943. :-(

Hamburg was a fully legitimate military target, you won't find many Germans complaining about that bombing. Dresden, though, that's something different. Even when I would cite the V-2 production of vB as one of the main charges against him - what I do not - then this could not be compared to those who developed bombs for the allies. Those guys knew that those bombs can be used for very exact bombings, vB on the other hand knew that his V-2 could impossibly be used to hit exactly a specified target, he was fully aware that his rockets would go down randomly and never ever hit anything particular. It was a terror weapon, built and used to terrorize and kill civilians.--Twiw 17:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

lies all the time about his affiliation with the Nazis - such a man can impossibly get called a hero.

The other side of the coin is that neither project Paperclip nor the tribunerals ever found anything truly damning about him (but his boss *was* charged with war crimes). So it really seems to be only guilt by association.WolfKeeper 05:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

When you read the link I provided in the article you will see that Paperclip did not care at all about charged against any of the scientists - rather than that Paperclip was used to cleans the scientists biography and to hide unwanted facts. vB never attended a war crime tribunal, though. He was way to important for the US military than losing him due to the outcome of such a tribunal.--Twiw 17:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I suggest that the section covering his Nazi career and his affiliation with the Nazis gets vastly expanded. --Twiw 00:15, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

It may very well be that Von Braun was the only reason that America landed on the moon. One or two of his key decisions seem to have made the difference that permitted a landing before 1970. For example, the Russian N-1 failed, partly because it was too small. Von Braun deliberately increased the size of Saturn V, and that saved Apollo. Certainly the Americans were extremely unlikely to have made it without German help, and he was the natural leader of the german scientists, and he made good decisions that were and are widely respected; the Russians lost their leader during the program and it never recovered. Indeed, it was cancelled. If the Apollo program had been later, it may be that the Russians might actually have finished their program, since the programs would have been neck and neck. Whatever else you can say about von Braun- he was a brilliant manager. Who is to say what would have happened if the Russians had won the moon race????WolfKeeper 05:04, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Even when Russia would have made it first to the moon, this would not change anything in the biography of vB. Getting a man up to the moon is a great achievement, not many would disagree, but on what that success was based upon must be asked. In Dora-Mittelbau at least 10 thousand people died for that later success, vB being fully aware of it. A brillant manager, maybe. In order to call vB a brillant manager you have to see him in a pure scientifical light. Excluding all and everything aside of his commitment to science. No offense, but based on such point of view one could call Adolf Eichmann a brillant manager too. I don't remember whom I'm quoting here (very roughly) but it's quite fitting: "The scientifical development of the V-2 and the production facilities, torture and death did not happen in two parallel universes."--Twiw 17:57, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

@wolfkeeper: Thanks for the Nasa link you provided, but you have confused von Braun admitting that he visited the production facility Mittelwerk with his lifelong denial that he has ever visited the KZ Dora-Mittelbau. Note that the plant and the KZ are two different places. Of course he visited the plant and he never denied it, but he insisted that he has never been inside of the KZ.--Twiw 21:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Von Braun choosed slavery in Dora for V2 building

L'historienne américaine Linda Hundt vient de révéler que von Braun était parfaitement au courant des crimes commis à Dora, qu'il était depuis le début un nazi militant, farouche admirateur de Hitler. Or, les autorités américaines étaient au courant, mais elles ont maintenu le secret dont elles avaient recouvert ce qui, en nom de code, s'appelait "Paperclip", opération consistant à récupérer les savants et les techniciens de l'industrie de guerre pour les besoins des armées des Etats-Unis. C'est ainsi que furent étouffés tous les procès que la justice américaine tenta d'intenter aux criminels de guerre nazis, et que l'on s'efforça de couvrir d'un épais voile de silence ce qui s'était passé à Dora

L'affaire Paperclip. La récupération des scientifiques nazis par les Américains, 1945-1990; Linda Hundt Editions Stock 404 pages

Mondsüchtig Wernher von Braun et la naissance de l'Aérospatiale dans un esprit de barbarie Rainer Eisfeld, Rowohlt, Hamburg BIOGRAPHIE DE VON BRAUN

The Buchenwald Report, Westview Press, Bourder-San Francisco-Oxford in German "Der Buchenwald Report" Verlag CH Beck Munich

sources Linda Hundt http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/Durand97a/index.html

Un historien allemand, le professeur Rainer Eisfeld, vient de son côté de publier une biographie de von Braun qui confirme et complète les révélations de Linda Hundt2. C'est von Braun lui-même qui demanda un rendez-vous à Hitler, qui le reçu, pour lui expliquer qu'il fallait construire des fusées capables de détruire des villes étrangères depuis des pas de tir établis en Allemagne et qu'il se faisait fort de réaliser ce projet. Hitler et ses adjoints décidèrent de l'aider par tous les moyens, notamment en lui fournissant une main-d'oeuvre concentrationnaire qui garderait le secret (puisqu'elle était destinée à périr)3.

are we in the french wikipedia ?!??!? -- 84.172.73.160 20:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

mais non! - Dravecky 03:25, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Von Braun in anime

Someone should mention Von Braun City from Yoshiyuki Tomino's Mobile Suit Gundam. It's an independent city(-state?) on the moon in the UC (original) universe.

Please do the research to clarify the query and then add this reference to the Cultural references section. I suggest creating a new subsection there called "In anime". Thanks for your input!  David Kernow 21:27, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Featured Article

If we could only get some inline citations this would make one hell of a feature article. I don't know about his treatment of those working on the V2 rockets, and will leave that debate to others. But this is a long article about someone who contributed to both World War II and NASA rockets. And the rest of his biography is pretty neat, too. It's already been featured on the Italian Wikipedia.

All we need are inline citations and a nomination. Captain Jackson 05:17, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Much of von Braun's production team, however, was captured by the Russians

What happened to them? 67.40.249.122 06:58, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

According to the docu-drama "Space Race", they (led by Grotrupp) were used by the Russians to reverse engineer a copy of the V-2 (The technical drawings, etc, being in the hands of the Americans) but were then dropped from the Soviet program and left in "obscurity in East Germany". More accurate information on this and citations are probably needed before inclusion. --81.179.254.250 19:34, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

According to ...The Heavens and the Earth by Walter McDougall, "all they [the Russians] got were rank and file of the V-2 program, engineers and minor technicians scattered over the eastern zone." (p 45). von Braun took the core of his team (basically everyone whom he immediately worked with) with him to the US. The Soviets set out specifically to capture as much of the V-2 labs and personnel as possible, but they were not very successful; most of the important files had already been raided by Americans after von Braun surrended to them.--ragesoss 19:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

A detailed first-hand account of the post-war Soviet rocket program is given by Boris Chertok. He was among the first Russians to arrive at Peenemünde and was the chief designer of guidance and control systems of the Soviet space program. He wrote a four-volume series "Rockets and People", now available in English from NASA. In short, it confirms the "Space Race" and McDougall stories above. After the initial period of reverse-engineering in Peenemünde, the work was moved back to Russia. The Germans were taken to Russia as well, but for mainly security reasons were not part of the core Korolev's group and instead worked in isolation on restoring the recovered V-2 equipment. Chertok says Korolev was not interested in collaboration with the German team and moved ahead with reproducing V-2 as R-1 and evloving it into R-2 and then starting his independent series of designs. Sometime in the early 1950s (I don't have the book handy to check) the Germans were sent back to (Eastern) Germany. Considering this and the above two quotes, the statement in the main article "In the Soviet Union, Sergei Korolev and his German team of scientists and engineers plowed ahead with several new rocket designs and the Sputnik program" is grossly inaccurate, and I edited it to remove the word "German". ScalarField 19:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

References for my AFAIK

The Nazi Impact on a German Village by Walter Rinderle and Bernard Norling:

On the whole the German bishops were pressured to respond to the proffered hand of friendship extended by Hitler and to rescind their opposition toward joining the movement. (Page 110)

Besides coercing some villagers to join the NSDAP in October 1933 and thereafter, the country leader tried to control the votes of others. (Page 114)

Industry and Ideology: I. G. Farben in the Nazi Era by Peter Hayes:

After the NSDAP lifted its membership freeze in 1937 and began seeking recruits from the business world, most of IG's chief executives felt advised or pressured to join the party. (Page 200, with reference to the testimonies of terMeer and Kühne, Nürnberg Military Tribunal, vol. 7, pp. 616-17, 636-7)

Settling Scores: German Music, Denazification, and the Americans by David Monod:

He said that he had been "pressured" to do so earlier, when he was working in Ulm (1928-34), but had only joined in order to secure the Aachen promotion. (Page 88)

Allianz and the German Insurance Business, 1933-1945 by Gerald D. Feldman:

the DAF pressured him to join the Party. He decided to join at this time, rather than run into trouble with the Party once again and possibly have the DAF (or President Amend of the RAA) insist on his dismissal on grounds of non-membership and then dictate who should take his place. (Page 452)

Is this enough? I have plenty more references. Now please provide a source that supports your statement:

...there exists no evidence that pressure was ever used to make people join the Nazi party...

Mushroom (Talk) 16:41, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

You have not cited any evidences. You have cited what a lot of the Nazis claimed after the end of the war: "I have been forced to join the NSDAP, but I'm not a Nazi". As you might know, after the end of WW2, suddenly no German was a Nazi anymore. That's what hundred thousands claimed, v.Braun being only one of them. And even when you would be able to actually prove that one or more persons were pressured into joining the NSDAP, this would have no reference to von Brauns claim that he was pressured into joining the SS. The SS was the most elitist of the Nazis organisations, the racial and ideological elite, and nobody - outside of the Waffen SS branch - was forced into it. --Twiw 17:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying that von Braun wasn't a Nazi or that he was pressured to join the SS. I'm just saying that the sentence "there exists no evidence that pressure was ever used to make people join the Nazi party" is not NPOV, since a lot of books claim otherwise. Mushroom (Talk) 23:51, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Paperclip

part of the mission known as Operation Paperclip, an operation with the purpose to employ German scientists who were formerly considered as war criminals or security threats (like von Braun) in the United States.

This reads like the purpose of Paperclip was to employ war criminals. Paperclip did not employ anyone, the US Army did. Paperclip's purpose (and Overcast before it) was to make use of the scientists and to transfer technology. The use of war criminals was a consequence of decisions made during Paperclip, but certainly not the main purpose. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 16:13, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I clarified my misguiding edit. Although Paperclips purpose was - at least partly - to get Nazi scientists into the US despite of the objections of the State Department, after cleansing their biography, it was like you said not the only purpose. --Twiw 18:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes- that's better. I was going to edit it myself, but WP was up and down and locked most of the day. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 21:58, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Rocket science and politics (section title) and Nazi career in general

I suggest the section rocket science and politics being renamed to Rockets, Nazis and KZs, Nazi career or The Nazis rocketeer Reason for my suggestion is that no section title has any references to his intense affiliation with the Nazi regime, the section titles actually provide the impression that vB was in opposition to the Nazi regime (only reference in section titles to the Nazis is: Arrest by the Nazi regime(!)), while that was clearly not the case. An encyclopedia can not have an article about a highly controversial man like vB without accentuating his Nazi affiliation at very least as much as his arrest by the Nazis, what was actually a minor incident, after all the arrest was nothing but an "Ehrenhaft". I find it somewhat disturbing that an article on Wikipedia that is featured as a good article had almost no references to, let me call it the extremely unpretty brown side of vB, before I added some stuff. I mean, creating an entire section for his two-weeks arrest by the Nazis, but mentioning nowhere that over years, vB personally visited at least 2 KZs, personally picked labor slaves, personally ordered labor slaves and was fully aware of the circumstances the labor slaves had to "live" in - just to name a few points - provides the impression that the article is highly biased. Any opinions on that? --Twiw 23:33, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

KZ?

Go ahead and be bold, but please provide citations. You see to be a good writer, but you are not citing your sources in some cases. This will be important when other editors start looking at your entries. I'll tag a few that need cites. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 00:01, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

My apologies, English is not my first language, I assumed that the German abbreviation for concentration camp (Konzentrationslager = KZ) would have been used internationally meanwhile. Obviously I was wrong.

One major problem I'm running into with the sources you asked me to cite is, that most - in some cases all - of them are in German language. And I'm unsure whether sources in German language would be appropriate here, very likely they are not. --Twiw 17:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I changed KZ to concentration camp so that us English speaking types would understand it, and it makes a good wiki link. I figured it out from context, but I have the advantage of understanding a bit of German and knowing how the Germans like to initialize longer words (of which there are a lot). --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:45, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I reverted the mention of "Nazi Germany" to "Germany" because not only was that never the actual name of the country but it ignores his many years of work in Germany before the Nazis came to power. There are plenty of mentions of his associations with the Nazis in the article already and adding one there seemed inaccurate and inflammatory. - Dravecky 03:29, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe that aint such a good idea. The fact the time period included a large amount of Nazi rule is significant enough to change the name to Nazi Germany. Few people actually were born and left Germany in only the Nazi period, but they were all described as living in Nazi Germany. Unless you plan on changing nearly all articles containing Nazi Germany to Germany, I advise you to undo it, as it makes Germany outside of the Nazi period look bad because some hasty readers will perceive the non-Nazi Germany as responsible for the KZs. 173.183.66.173 (talk) 01:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

NAZI arrest

I've tried to piece the two explanations together. So far as I know he was only arrested once, for two weeks. If we really do want two explanations of the same thing (and I'm not at all convinced), they need to be under one heading at the very least.WolfKeeper 02:53, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

SS photo

The article links to [Wernher von Braun in SS uniform]. Supposedly vB is the man in black behind Himmler, but I certainly cannot see his face. The site this is located, reformation.org is rather suspect and abounds with conspiracy theories. For example, look at the articles on Leslie Groves or the Kennedy assasination. The vB article does reference a book by Dornberger, but I don't have that in my library. I think this may be suspect unless anyone has a better provenance. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 14:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I read elsewhere (I think the NASA site) that the picture of von Braun wasn't full face. I had to look at it twice before I realised that it really was him; you can recognize him. I'm quite sure that that really is the picture in question. I do agree with you about the site in general though, but the picture seems legitimate.WolfKeeper 02:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

That may, or may not be Von Braun, and given the bent of the site itself, It would be questionable. The person is obscured, and can not be readily confirmed to be Von Braun.(75.69.241.91 (talk) 20:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC))

Kennedy photo

According to many histories, WvB worked for the ABMA in Huntsville for many years until the Marshall Space Center was created in 1960. The article said Werner was transferred to Marshall at that time. So why is WvB showing JFK around the ABMA rather than the Marshall center in 1963? Where did this photo come from, anyway? 71.202.68.103 05:16, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

(New entries here should go at the bottom of the page. Simply click the "+" to the right of "edit this page" to create a new section.)

Your question did make me notice that Army Ballistic Missile Agency needs a lot more work- there are a number of dates that are off.

It looks like the photo is from the Dr. Wernher von Braun Photograph Collection at the Restone Arsenal web site. There is no caption, just a date. Given the aircraft in the background, it was probably taken at the Redstone Army Airfield, which is neither MSFC nor ABMA. There a number of other good photos of Von Braun in this collection. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 13:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Wan Hu

It says in Wan Hu article that "The legend of Wan Hoo was not recorded in any Chinese history book. It was first mentioned in Rockets and Jets written by American author Herbert S. Zim in 1945. It was then introduced into China via translation, and that is why what exact Chinese name this legendary person had (萬虎 or 萬戶) as mentioned above could not be determined just based on the pronunciation. This story is more an urban legend invented a half century ago, than a Chinese history record." And this article tells a anecdote about 12-year-old Wernher who was affected by the legend of Wan Hu, which means the legend was known in 1924. So there's quite clear conflict. Latre 17:32, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I noticed the same conflict, and changed the Wan Hoo entry accordingly. The Rockets and Jets reference is the first written mention of the myth. Presumably the von Braun family swapped stories about ancient Chinese astronomers when they weren't planning the final solution.Tafinucane 00:12, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I do belive I own that book. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.174.135.175 (talk • contribs) 21:07, 26 May 2006

Tafunicane, you come off sounding like an ignorant bigot with your offhand comment of "planning the final solution". My suggestion is that you refrain from editing Wikipedia. 71.116.122.74 (talk) 20:40, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Dr. Strangelove

I find it strange that the On film and television section does not mention Dr. Strangelove.

Ziusudra 20:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Popular Science articles

In addition to writing for Collier's, Dr. von Braun wrote for Popular Science, an American monthly magazine. I remember seeing the last of these articles in the early to mid 1970s. Anyone else?

College/university

The Technical College of Berlin did not become the Technical University of Berlin until 1946. Therefore, it would be more proper to use college with a link to the university article. --Gadget850 ( Ed) 11:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Christian in science?

Apparently his receiving a telescope as a present for his Lutheran confirmation is the reason he's put into the category of "Christians in science". Is there any evidence of his professing and/or practicing any form of Christianity in his adulthood?

--Hieronymus Illinensis 22:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Wernher_von_Braun WolfKeeper 02:16, 19 May 2006 (UTC) i think heis.look a t his grave —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.121.209.17 (talk) 04:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Casualities from V-1 and V-2 attacks on Britain

The claimed total of 66,000+ deaths from V1 and V2 attacks on Britain in 1944 and 1945 is very different to the number asserted in the wikipedia entries for those weapons. They cant both be right. And the number mentioned in this article is implausibly large and more likely to be wrong

How do you pronounce this guy's name?

The article ought to include a pronunciation key.

Contradiction

The story given in this article about von Braun being influenced by the legend of Wan Hu at the age of 12 (1924) contradicts the story given in the section "The Origin of Wan Hoo" on the above-mentioned article. If the story of Wan Hu was not given in any Chinese history book, and was first mentioned in print in 1945, then introduced to China later, how could von Braun possibly have heard of it in 1924? Diego001 10:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Wernher von Braun

Stating that Wernher von Braun was head of the team that developed the Nazi V2-rockets "that killed over 7000 people in Britain in 1944 and 1945" is incomplete.

V2-rockets (+ V1-bombs) were also fired at Belgium in particular the city of Antwerp. Surrounding areas of Antwerp ware also hit.

This is not the first time I have noticed that the V2-rockets and V1-bombs were only supposed to have hit Britain. Could it be because these articles were written by a British citizen who thinks only "his/her Britain" suffered under the V2 and V1 attacks ?

Perhaps you should also mention what the V in V1 / V2 actually meant.--41.244.9.37 (talk) 19:49, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

One should try to provide a complete and objective picture of these matters and I feel personally offended by the statement in this article on Wernher von Braun. (background: 4 of my family members were killed and my father was severely injured by a V1-bomb). Jerry bogie 15:15, 11 December 2006 (UTC) Although I agree that many nations suffered the scourge of V-2rockets.England was the worst hit.Thousands of people were killed in the bombardment which took place almost dailyGwendeloyn 14:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)gwendeloyn

Cause of death: crash?

There is doubt on Ucla9030's addition on 22:50, 20 March 2006:
"Von Braun sustained an injury from a crash and unbeknownst to him started to bleed internally. By the time his family convinced him to go to the hospital it was too late to stop the bleeding."

Please provide a source for that statement.

Career after NASA

"After leaving NASA, von Braun became a vice-president of Fairchild Industries in Germantown, Maryland, where he helped establish and promote the National Space Institute,..." This sounds kind of "to clichee to be true". ;-) Is this a fake? Please provide a source for that statement. --Nemissimo II 09:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Verification took me about 7seconds, using Google. Gwen Gale 03:19, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Nemissimo II 21:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment: I am so pleased to find this post-NASA career verified. I had previously believed an urban legend that von Braun was reduced to driving a taxicab in New York City because he was unable to find employment after NASA cutbacks. A mind is a terrible thing to waste. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.119.192.231 (talk) 21:57, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed?

I was officially demanded to join the National Socialist Party. At this time (1937) I was already technical director of the Army Rocket Center at Peenemünde ... My refusal to join the party would have meant that I would have to abandon the work of my life. Therefore, I decided to join. My membership in the party did not involve any political activities ... in Spring 1940, one SS-Standartenführer (SS Colonel) Müller ... looked me up in my office at Peenemünde and told me that Reichsführer-SS Heinrich Himmler had sent him with the order to urge me to join the SS. I called immediately on my military superior ... Major-General W. Dornberger. He informed me that ... if I wanted to continue our mutual work, I had no alternative but to join.[citation needed]

That claim has been often disputed because in 1940, the SS had shown no interest in Peenemünde yet. Also, the assertion that persons in von Braun's position were pressured to join the Nazi party, let alone the SS, has been disputed.

Who has disputed this claim a reference needs to be provided or the sentence removed

Roswell

Von Braun's secret presence at White Sands is a simple explanation for whatever crashed at Roswell, and also for the "meteorites" that landed in Greensburg Kansas in 1948.Frizb 16:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

This is a great theory! If one could show that von Braun's presence at White Sands (or the involvement of his team in the launches there) was being kept a secret, it would not only make the theory more plausible, but enhance the current article as well. (It doesn't currently say his presence was secret. Do you have a citable source for that?) (sdsds - talk) 06:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes I do, but the FBI regularly greps the Internet for the author's name.

In addition I once read in a book at the library that the German scientists used to go down into Mexico for binge drinking in the cantinas there. This might have something to do with the reason they were transferred to Alabama, Redstone. A friend of mine who knows an expert thinks it is probably due to something else. Frizb (talk) 00:03, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Far more likely than any possible conspiracy theory is that US Senator John Sparkman saw an opportunity to funnel billions of Federal dollars into the sleepy cotton town (with an almost-abandoned chemical weapons depot) that he called home. There's a reason a major road and a couple of schools in Huntsville are named for Sparkman and it ain't the Roswell aliens. - Dravecky (talk) 00:32, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Calling Huntsville a "sleepy cotton town" indicates to me a negative bias toward the city. Sleepy certainly hasn't been ::descriptive of the town since World War II and the area was never known for growing cotton. To be sure, textile mills ::utilizing cotton was the principle industry in Huntsville's early history but that doesn't make it a cotton town any more than ::Linden, New Jersey is an "oil town" because of its large refinery. I'll certainly agree with you that Senator John

Sparkman played a significant role in the town's post-war development.TL36 (talk) 13:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Press coverage while at Redstone Arsenal

The article currently states:

from 1945 to 1957 [...] the press tended to dwell on von Braun's past as a member of the SS and the slave labor used to build his V-2 rockets.

While his SS and slave labor connections are currently well documented, the article would be very much improved by citing a source citation from press coverage during 1945-1957 that mentions it. This would directly illuminate one of the most noteworthy questions about von Braun's career: "Who knew what, when?" (sdsds - talk) 19:40, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Tom Lehrer and libel

I've removed the sentence "Von Braun later sued Lehrer for libel and forced Lehrer to hand over all royalties from the song.", as most sources appear to suggest that this is untrue, and merely an urban legend. Please do not repeat this assertion unless you can provide cites to verifiable, reliable, sources that back this up. -- The Anome 09:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Christian writings

Wernher did not write against evolution and on religious subjects? He figures prominently in some creationist tracts and of course his views on subjects which are not related to aerospace engineering are somewhat suspect. So what is the origin of all the material he supposedly wrote on evolution? Is this all forged material? What is it? I share the disgust of some of the authors here with the "born again" agenda, but I am trying to be as honest and as straightforward as I can in documenting the situation.--Filll 17:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Kennedy Photo redux

I found another photo in the NASA archives of Kennedy and von Braun. The caption reads "President Kennedy and Dr. von Braun, Director of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center, in the official vehicle for touring the center during the President's visit to MSFC on September 11, 1962." So now I have to question is not only the "ABMA" part wrong but is the "1963" part wrong as well? If there's consensus, I can replace the existing photo with this photo which has a well-documented setting and date. Thoughts? - Dravecky 00:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The photo you have found is better documented, but sadly not as visually compelling, largely because they are seated rather than walking. You are right that the copy of the "walking" photo on Wikipedia is not well documented. It is public domain, but is a work of the U.S. Army, not a work of NASA. According to the Redstone archive[6], the date of the "walking" visit was 19 May 1963. The ABMA part, though, appears to have been a misconstruction of a Wikipedia editor. (sdsds - talk) 06:44, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Disney photo

Walt Disney and Wernher von Braun, shown in this 1954 photo holding a model of his Mars lander, collaborated on a series of three educational films.

I don't know why Glst2 insists on deleting this image since it's definitely still available in the Commons and is visible to me and several colleagues using various browsers. The frame, as best I can tell, hasn't been "blank for weeks" so if I can get a bit of consensus that we're not having a mass hallucination of Disney and von Braun plaing with model rockets then I'd like to add this image back into the article. It illustrates a key time in von Braun's life and his rise to popularity with the general public. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dravecky (talk • contribs).

Dravecky, its not bad intent. The image is blank not only in the WvB article, but also in Commons where it has been uploaded; and also in the two other articles where it is inserted, Walt Disney and TWA Moonliner. (I can see all other images in these articles.) When I right-click-save the "image" to harddisk and open it with the Windows image and fax viewer or with Photoshop, it comes up blank. If you can still see it, it might be because it is still cached on your machine. You might want to empty your browser cache and try again. But I am eager to hear what others are seeing to the right of this text, or aren't. - If the image can be restored to WikiCommons, I would be the first to put it back into the WvB article, as it is the perfect illustration to this section. In fact, I have written the legend for it. --Glst2 15:49, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure you're acting in good faith. To that end, I've flushed my cache and forced reloads and the image is still present. I've had friends across Texas, some of whom had never before been to Wikipedia, look at it and they can all still see it. I will, of course, wait for other editors to weigh in on this but I don't understand why it's not showing up for you. Maybe a flush of your cache then a load of this link is worth a try? Color me puzzled. - Dravecky 05:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

This nagged me, so I had people access the image in Commons, and on this talk page, using WinXP/IE7 and Linux/FF. Result: there is something definitely weird going down here. Apparently everybody else CAN see the image. Only my high-end HP mobile workstation, which had given me the image before (and continues to reliably show me any other image in Wikipedia or whatever else I access during my long working hours) seems to have developed a problem with this particular image, whatever way I try to look at it. When I try to save it, I'm getting not a JPEG but a 1-pixel GIF. Well, I'm putting it back into the article and apologize for the confusion, humbly recognizing that computing can still give me surprises after 20 yerars of intense practice. --Glst2 07:33, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Funny =) I can see the picture right here in the discussion, but it doesn't come up in the article. That's Vodoo :P —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.113.121.97 (talk) 04:32, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Wernher von Braun 'Surrender'?

Finding sources

I have been researching for a book about 30 Commando Assault Unit - 30AU and have uncovered documentary evidence that they captured some of the Nazi scientists that reportedly 'Surrendered' along with the von Brauns and Dornberger in Bavaria. I have also heard and read memoirs, from the few surviving 30AU Marine veterans, that at least one of the von Braun brothers did not 'surrender' but was in fact captured from within Germany by 30AU then handed over to US agents on board a DC3 at a captured airbase in northern Germany. These and many more things are revealed in this new website dedicated to 30AU - http://www.30AU.co.uk - Ian Fleming's 'Red Indians' and the secret missions that remain classified by the US and UK Governments.--GHubert-Smith

I don't consider http://www.30AU.co.uk to be credible because of its strong emphasis on sales and because of its requirement of Javascript. I don't trust that site to run Javascript in my browser. Anyway, it seems like we have to pay them money before we can attempt to verify anything. Do you know the website operator or book author? Can you get them to release some information (free) for verification purposes?--Mumia-w-18 18:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

What is the title of the book? What is its ISBN number? Who authored it? Who published it?--Mumia-w-18 18:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello Mumia, The references and sources are mainly - Attain by Surprise edited by David Nutting ISBN 095262572-5 & The Paper Clip Conspiracy by Tom Bower ISBN 0-586-08686-2 & Artic Snow to Dust of Normandy by Patrick Dalzel-Job(e) ISBN 1-84415-238-3 & From Pole to Pole by J.P.Riley ISBN 1-871999-02-2 & The Hazard Mesh by J.A.C. Hugill - out of print & the orginal Attain by Surprise - Out of print & From Nazis to NASA by Bob Ward ISBN 0-7509-4303-3 & the Papers of J.A.C. Hugill ref: GBR/0014/HUGL - Churchhill archives & History of 30 Assault Unit Ref GB99 KCLMA - Liddell Hart Centre & National Archives Docs History of 30 Commando Ref ADM223/214 and others, these are all used for the website and information sources.

I have removed everything pertaining to my book and my agent will furnish you with answers to further questions very shortly.

As regards to the website, it is not for me to judge, but I hope it can be looked at objectively by someone who can allow javascript and be taken on it's merits, which in my opinion are many.GHubert-Smith 07:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello GHubert-Smith. Let's talk here.--Mumia-w-18 16:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi, yes that better, thanks for advice and comments, I'm new to this and have probably jumped the gun a bit! I'll slow down and approach with more consideration as things progress.. i'll happily send you any information you require about the documents I've uncovered from the National Archives and the interviews i've conducted with the few surviving veterans of 30AU that remain.GHubert-Smith 07:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

The website now has list of references and sources and access to FREE PDF with regard to claims made therein. Most sources are linked to book sales from Amazon.com, the sources not avaliable there are covered within FREE pdf. Hopefully that may be sufficient for you to reconsider it as a creditable source? and if so i'd like to ask if you may reconsider my above entry into the Wernher von Braun, Talk section? GHubert-Smith 13:25, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I think this entire section belongs on Talk:Wernher von Braun, so it's best to move it there soon. I have some other things to do, so I'm going to stop watching that page as well as your talk page soon. Good luck.--Mumia-w-18 23:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

GHubert-Smith, please indulge me and tell me, in one paragraph or less, what you believe the true account of von Braun's "surrender" or "capture" to be. I'm about to research your claims, but I have to know what your claims are first.--Mumia-w-18 (November 23 2007).

I have bad news Mr. GHubert-Smith, I'm at the library, and their card catalog doesn't recognize any of the book sources you provided. In addition, none of the ISBN's you supplied us with are recognized by Google Books. I don't think my prospects of getting access to specific British Army Intellgence documents is good, so I'm beginning to think that the information you provided fails the verifiability test.--Mumia-w-18 (November 23 2007).

I'm in America, and the British Army Intelligence documents ([GBR/0014/HUGL] and [GB99 KCLMA]) you referred me to are inaccessible to me. Your information fails WP:VERIFY.--Mumia-w-18 (November 23 2007)

I apologize Mr. GHubert-Smith. There was a searching failure on my end. The books you referenced do seem to exist. I'll consult them when I get a chance.--Mumia-w-18 (talk) 03:47, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello Mumia, I can assure you they do all exist, but it will be like finding needle in a haystack picking out the discrepancies. I will need to email you the PDF (available from website) which has copies of relevant documents from the English Archives which do not match the American documents used for 'The Paperclip Conspiracy' by Tom Bower. It also has maps and timelines which give a clear indication of the actual version of events.

Please bare in mind that the existence of 30AU was classified and even denied right up until 1997. The PDF also contains the conversations and writings of the few surviving veterans who give a different version of events to that historically recorded. The documents only prove that Prof. Herbert Wagner, designer of the H293 Guided bomb (already used to sink HMS Egret and the HMT Rohna) was captured by an American Naval Officer Lambie, who was attached to 30AU and commanding a very small force of British Royal Marine Commandos (Team 5), whereas US documents reported that he 'surrendered' in Bavaria with the von Braun's and Dornberger. According to the the version of events I have uncovered from a 30AU sniper and other interviews, at least one of the von Braun brothers was captured in the Harz Mountain range and handed to American agents hanging out of a Dakota at an airfield in Northern Germany, then flown to Bavaria where the 'Surrender' was then staged for the world's media to record. Now there were hundreds of scientists involved and I do not know how all this was achieved or orchestrated but in my opinion what I have uncovered puts the whole thing in serious doubt. It is a very complicated story with a lot of information to absorb which all points to the same conclusion.GHubert-Smith (talk) 09:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

p.s. All the documents pertaining to my discoveries are in public archives and available to anyone who asks for them. I am also in the process of scanning and completing a PDF of them ALL (a large task) for free download on the website.GHubert-Smith (talk) 14:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Let's continue this conversation in Digging for information.--Mumia-w-18 (talk) 06:38, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Digging for information

Hello again GHubert-Smith. I'm reading The Paperclip Conspiracy (ISBN 0316103993) right now. I'm going through the indexed items relating to Wernher von Braun; is there a specific page that I need to look at to verify the alternate "surrender" scenario?--Mumia-w-18 (talk) 06:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello Mumia, I fully accept that a part of what I'm saying comes under the heading 'The Truth' and 'Original Research' but I would also argue that National Archive documents that are available to anyone do constitute verifiable publication and when those documents conflict with other 'historical' record and cast doubt over large parts of what the world has had to swallow as 'fact' for sixty years then we (you) have a problem. The pages I refer to in that book are P.129 which clearly states that Prof. H. Wagner 'Surrendered' with the von Brauns and Dornberger in Bavaria. But according to 'Attain by Surprise' and National Archive documents he was in fact captured by 30AU then flown to Bavaria to be part of the 'staged surrender' (alongside one of the von Brauns according to my 'Original Research'). All of which leads us to here.

Can I suggest that I could possibly construct a paragraph explaining the 'verifiable' conflict without eluding to my 'original research' that at least points to the area of doubt that the conflict represents?

Apologies for putting you to all this trouble, I'm not trying to pervert the course of history or to create unnecessary argument or conflict just get to the facts.GHubert-Smith (talk) 08:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

This information, if confirmed, would be too insignificant for a paragraph; it would be too insignificant for even a sentence. It would be a footnote. I'm not trying to belittle your contribution, but in the overall life of Wernher von Braun, the issue of whether he was captured or surrendered is not very significant. I might create a footnote like so:

<ref>The account of Wernher von Braun's acquisition by the Americans is disputed. See ''Attain by Surprise'' page ???.</ref>--Mumia-w-18 (talk) 09:22, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The more I think about it, the more I think this information isn't admissible . My doing original research to confirm this scenario wouldn't make things any better.--Mumia-w-18 (talk) 09:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello Mumia, I was only originally asking for a small footnote, less than one line. I guess it's all a matter of where your principles, morals and allegiances lay. If you think that it is insignificant for Governments to lie about the very foundation of the US space program and in essence all of human history, from that point in time, then I would have to disagree! strongly! Especially when that foundation is so contentious and shaky to start with!

I'd like to thank you very much for all your time, obviously I have no choice but to accept your ruling. I do realise that maybe it is too close to 'original research' and 'The Truth' over 'verifiable information' and I will have to wait for my footnote.GHubert-Smith (talk) 09:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Nobel Prize in Physics

It will be interesting if someone shown if he ever was nominated for the Nobel Prize in Physics. Mistico (talk) 21:24, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

On the basis of his contributions he should have been anyway. I've just altered his description in the first paragraph to 'rocket physicist and astronautics engineer' which hopefully gives the semantically best description. I know he was probably the most experienced and capable rocket scintist ever, but when you consider the man you realise for him it was a means to an end. He was, for me an Astronauts Engineer/Scientist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.10.217.39 (talk) 00:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

The Moon should be capitalized

The Moon, when referring to Earth's moon, should be capitalized. It is not throughout the article. I don't have time to correct it. 69.215.151.205 (talk) 13:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC).

I endorse. Aldo L (talk) 13:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Mistake

In the article stay "Several German cities (Bonn, Neu-Isenburg, Mannheim, Mainz), and dozens of smaller towns, have named streets after Wernher von Braun. Remarkably, all these places are situated in Germany's Southwest and South - the American and French parts of the Allied occupation zones. There seem to be no von Braun streets in the northern parts of the former Federal Republic of Germany, which were occupied by the British. Having had London suffer from his rockets, it is quite understandable that the United Kingdom would have discouraged German attempts at honoring von Braun."

This is not correct also in NRW for example Hamm (West-Germany, former britisch sector) (http://maps.google.de/maps?hl=de&q=Wernher-von-Braun-Stra%C3%9Fe+12,+59077+Hamm,+Deutschland&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=X&oi=geocode_result&resnum=1&ct=title) is a street named after him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.61.98.40 (talk) 23:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

In fact, it's total rubbish. Streets in Germany are always named after persons already died. you won't find a Helmut-Kohl-Street or anything similar, Braun died in 1977, I don't think British government had any influence or interest in German Streetnames at that time. It's pure OR and a (stupid) POV, I deleted the sentence. 84.139.232.206 (talk) 22:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

He did not do well in physics and mathematics at school?

I have found this quote elsewhere. But I see it very difficult to swallow. This man designed several of the most magnificent pieces of machinery of the 20th Century, so in those matters he was clearly above us, poor mortals. Spaniard Antonio Ribera wrote in "La conquista del Espacio" (apparently based on some Willy Ley's opus) that even as a child von Braun was obviously of superior intellect, to the point that in one occasion when the math teacher didn't show up he stood up by the blackboard and lectured his fellow classmates. Ribera confirms, however, that he was in constant trouble with the faculty, due to his stubborn attitude towards the feasibility of science fiction (a teacher came close to call him a "lunatic"), and maybe because of some hint of blueblooded arrogance coming from young Wernher. Aldo L (talk) 13:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

It is nevertheless true. He was a lazy student and got poor marks. He didn't start to study seriously until he got the bug for rocketry when he was 17 or so. This question feeds into a common misperception that von Braun was a scientist (as shown by the question above about the Nobel Prize for Physics). He was not a scientist: he never worked as a physicist or a mathematician. He worked as an engineer - he built rockets. He did not work on the basic science that underlay rocketry, although of course he understood it. His real genius was as a manager of large-scale engineering projects: First at Peenemunde, then at Nordhausen, then at Huntsville. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 19:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

LOL Mr. Toad. From Nasa.gov: von Braun received a Ph.D. in physics on July 27, 1934. TL36 (talk) 10:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

GA Sweeps

In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of June 12, 2008, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

The review can be found here. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 00:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Portrait or Photograph?

The image of Maria von Braun in this article is described as a portrait, though it looks more like a photograph. I know that technically a portrait can be a photograph, but common usage of the word tends toward a painting. I found myself staring at this looking for possible brush strokes! (Could be because I'm up too late!) CosineKitty (talk) 04:11, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Certainly a photograph can be a photograph, but I would suggest that it is more appropriate for one that is thoughtfully prepared and carefully taken with the intent that it will be formally displayed, or reproduced in a significant publication. On the other hand, a few people believe that a "portrait" is any well-framed and displayed picture!98.148.116.163 (talk) 03:40, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

His thesis

This is an observation/query to those who are acquainted with the subject: 'His actual full thesis...was kept classified by the army' - which army? The post-war German army, the wartime German army, or the US army? If the answer is 'the post-war German army', was it kept secret from the US, or from the public? This isn't clear. Bbmap (talk) 16:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

The thesis was commissioned by the Reichswehr and they paid WvB while he wrote it. It was classified top secret and even the university library wasn't allowed to have a copy. (Neufeld, Von Braun, 68-9) Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 01:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

In-depth 1958 TIME profile

I've added "Reach for the Stars". TIME Magazine. 1958-02-17. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,862899-1,00.html.  as a reference to one sentence in this article. In fact, it's an in-depth 1958 profile of von Braun that could easily be used to expand or at least better-reference this article. I encourage other editors to use this resource. - Dravecky (talk) 16:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Von Braun as "rocket scientist"

There has been some controversy as to whether von Braun should be called a "rocket scientist", "a physicist" or "a rocket engineer." His most recent biographer, Michael J Neufeld, writes:

One term you will not find in this book is "rocket scientist." There has been a deep-rooted failure in the English-speaking media and popular culture to grapple with the distinction between science and engineering... Although Wehrner von Braun got a doctorate in physics in 1934, he never worked a day in his life thereafter as a scientist. He was an engineer and a manager of engineers, and he used that vocabulary when he was talking to his professional peers. Thus the correct term is "rocket engineer." (Michael J Neufeld, Wehrner von Braun: Dreamer of Space, Engineer of War, Alfred A Knopf 2007, xv)

Of von Braun's thesis, Neufeld notes:

"A major section on the theory of combustion in a rocket engine can fairly be described as physics, but most of the typescript was actually an engineering treatise on his rocket motors." (Neufeld 68).

Note that the statement that von Braun was an engineer and not a scientist or a physicist is now sourced to the best possible reference, namely a direct statement on the subject in the most recent biography by a highly qualified author. (Neufeld is chair of the Space History Division of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum, and has written the definitive hisory of the German rocket program, The Rocket and the Reich.) Thus it is not open to contributors here to continue to assert that von Braun was primarily a scientist or a physicist, and I will revert any edit that does so. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 02:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC) This is one of the crosses that engineers have to bear. I'm not one, but I know several from a message board to which I belong. The exact problem, actually, is that people don't know what engineers really do, and how vital they are to, really, everything. So their title gets inappropriately stolen by others, or misapplied by people generally to jobs that are not engineering jobs, and, as in the case of rocket scientists (sic), many true engineers aren't referred to as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pithecanthropus (talk • contribs) 03:48, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Recent vandalism

The spate of nonsense vandalism largely comes from the 161.97.212.* IP range which traces back to *.bhm.bvsd.k12.co.us and the Boulder Valley School District. No idea why the youth of Colorado have chosen this article to go after but please be vigilant while editing this article. Thanks. - Dravecky (talk) 22:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Fallout 3

I think it's pretty safe to say that the character of Dr Braun in Fallout 3 is based on Wernher con Braun... If anybody can confirm that then put it in —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.101.165.81 (talk) 08:27, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Wernher von Braun the Nietzschean

A recent edit of mine concerning the Philosophical position of Wernher von Braun related to an internet amazon feedback comment concerning a book. I am uncertain of Wernher von Braun's position in relation to Nietzsche, but wish to point out the following :

According to "Dr. Space By Bob Ward, John (FRW) Glenn", ISBN number : "[He]..could pilot an array of aircraft, loved scuba diving, and was a brilliant conversationalist, as much at ease discussing Nietzsche as nuclear fission."

Having searched briefly for Wernher von Braun and Nietzsche on Google Books (which is far from an in depth study of what Wernher von Braun thought of Nietzsche, and whether he believed in Nietzsche's philosophy), I have a general perception that Wernher von Braun was not only knowledgeable of Nietzsche (with what must have been an in-depth knowledge at that), but was verly likely sympathetic to Nietzsches political opinions and moral viewpoints ^{[citation needed]}. This is probably of nonsensical utility, but I think the article should address some of these issues at least partially.

ConcernedScientist (talk) 19:48, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

American stealing of German patents

Dozens of German high tech patents were stolen by the U.S. Government after WWII, part of the Morgenthau Plan to dismantle hundreds of German factories. A great part of this plan was undertaken as the Wikipedia article surlines. Later Americans just returned 10% of the stolen material under the Marshall Plan, but the overwhelming majority of the patents, factories, industrial and scientific material was never returned to Germany. In fact, a great part of the post-War American economic expansion should be credited to the transfer of German high tech to U.S. soil.--79.154.37.157 (talk) 01:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

This is nationalistic nonsense, German technology was not vastly more advanced than US technology, that it would have this kind of sweeping impact on the economy. The V-2 was full of copied US technology, copies of Sperry gyroscopes, the radio control system was based on an airplane landing system developed by NBS, etc. Furthermore, war reparations are not theft? 24.16.88.14 (talk) 12:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Also regarding patents: Anybody have solid information about von Braun and Robert Goddard's widow suing the US government for infringement of Goddard's patents? Million dollar settlement? Seems unlikely. ("I read it on the internet, so it must be true.")Lynxx2 (talk) 08:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)Lynxx2

Wernher von Braun and the SS

This section contains many errors. First, von Braun's membership in the SS was well known to be honorary (Bob Ward, Dr. Space, page 47 or check his FBI file - page 10 of the linked file). He commanded no troops, had no formal SS training, and rarely wore a uniform. Himmler would often give people an honorary membership in order to gain influence and control in various aspects of German society. This is not the same thing as being a real SS officer. Furthermore, he was never a member of the "Waffen-SS" at all. Where do you get this from? That was an armed branch of the SS that participated in battles. Wernher von Braun wasn't involved in anything like that. Furthermore, the SS riding club he was a member of was run by the "Reiter-SS" which was a different thing altogether. Anybody could join whether they were SS or not. It was a riding club designed to attract German nobility. There are many errors here with dates, details and ouright false information.

Furthermore, the statements implying he received no pressure to join are not sourced and should be removed. 98.166.247.147 (talk) 05:13, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

With regard to the references added to the statements claiming he received no pressure to join the SS, that reference (Bob Ward's Dr Space) does not say what is claimed in the text. It actually says quite the opposite. Instead it says "Dornberger advised von Braun to accept the commission; rejecting it would be taken as a dangerous show of disloyalty and a personal insult to the powerful, merciless Himmler". It would seem that not only is the article riddled with serious errors - it is outright dishonest. Does anybody care? 98.166.241.218 (talk) 12:27, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Allegations

It seems there are many here who either do not understand that Wikipedia strives to be factual, and not a forum for self righteous pseudo-intellectuals on a moronic crusade. Here is an actual statement that is on this page:

"The whole article is biased. No real mention of war criminal allegations"

No "real" mention of "allegations". Ummmm....This is not Conspirapedia, Allegatapedia, or Opinionpedia. Unless there is a viable reason, and sufficient documentation to even mention or elaborate about certain "allegations", they should not even be mentioned. If every well known allegation is given validity, then we would have President Obama's entry full of paragraphs alleging he was born in Kenya and all sorts of assorted foolishness. I hate to break it you little wannabe Simon Wesenthals, but minds a lot more learned than your own have investigated Von Braun and no smoking guns have been found. If some information surfaces about him at another time, then that information can be looked at.

In the meanwhile, I'd suggest that if you do not have verifiable information, but strong opinions that can not be proven, go to a conspiracy theory web site, or self publish a book outlining your opinions and theories. You need to keep it factual here, whether you look down on Von Braun's Nazi past or not. Stick to the facts, and don't use Wikipedia articles to modify a biographical article to conform with your personal opinions, or to engage in a self righteous "see what a good liberal I am" internet witch hunt. The facts speak for themselves and readers can reach their own conclusions. We are not conducting a virtual War Crimes trial here.(75.69.241.91 (talk) 20:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC))

father

His father was a member of the conservative DNVP (Winkler, Germany: the long road west, Volume 1). I changed the sentence (never a party politician) accordingly. HerkusMonte (talk) 08:19, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Newfeld's "Rocket an the Reich" briefly discusses von Braun's father's right-wing activity. DonPMitchell (talk) 12:15, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

New York Times Book Review/1/10/10

Here's a new book that someone who knows what they are doing may wish to add to the Additional Reading section of the von Braun article:

Dark Side of the Moon

Wernher von Braun, the Third Reich, and the Space Race by Wayne Biddle

The review, by David Holloway of Stanford University, is entitled "Houston, We Have a Problem"

"Werner von Braun, and this country, skirted the moral implications of his connection to the Nazis"

Easily searchable for necessary details, of course.

75.37.138.216 (talk) 08:24, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

It seems to me that von Braun in WW2-era Germany was not very political. He was a technical guy with dreams of space travel, he took rocket work where he could find it, and joined the Nazi party because people at his level were required to. Issues related to his connection with the Nazis are of course well-documented and appropriate for the article, but the placement in the lede paragraph that he was a Nazi party member and SS officer seem to put undue weight on these facts. I've read Bob Ward's biography (not exactly bad, but sort of lightweight) and looked through Neufeld's (more thorough than Ward's), and my impression is based on both of these. 69.228.170.24 (talk) 00:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Goddard and von Braun

I am sure that Goddard's work influenced von Braun, and it is true that the Germans had a couple spies who observed Goddard's experiemnts (Guellich) and relayed news and publications about Goddard (von Boetticher in the German embassy). Von Braun's group also spied on the Russians (probably more relevant to the V-1, which resembled the GIRD-6 project somewhat) and had copies of Glushko's rocket-engine work in their technical library.

However, the comments about Goddard in the "Prussian rocketeer..." section are not properly cited. The A-1/A-2 rocket did resemble and experiment by Goddard with heavy rotor to stabilize a rocket, but can we be sure this was copied? Goddard's comments about the V-2 was speaking in generality, there were no components in the V-2 copied from Goddard's rockets (which were nowhere near as large or sophisticated). Boris Chertok reports that some components in the V-2 were copies of Sperry gyroscope systems, but that is unrelated to Goddard. DonPMitchell (talk) 12:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Other writers have commented on Goddard examining V-2 components and realizing that their designs were based on some of his. Refer to this WP section on Goddard, Goddard -V2 for a general discussion, but I'm sure you'll find much more detailed information via Google. HarryZilber (talk) 19:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Cordell Hull

"On June 20, 1945, U.S. Secretary of State Cordell Hull approved the transfer of von Braun and his specialists to America; however this was not announced to the public until October 1, 1945. "

Cordell Hull wasn't U.S. Secretary of State on June 20, 1945. Edward Stettinius, Jr. held the position.--Gintaras8182 (talk) 14:00, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Space Camp

The first paragraph is ridiculous. 3 main ideas are introduced: he was a nazi engineer in Germany, he lead the space program in the US, he invented space camps. The space camp is an anecdote compared to the first two ideas. It's like mentioning Hitler's paintings as part of his legacy to the world. It's an insult to the victims of nazis to put space camps at the same level as forced labor and war crimes that Von Braun passively or actively condoned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.30.236.223 (talk) 06:02, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Diamonds Are Forever

That bit about Blofeld being a German scientist based on von Braun seems like crap to me. Blofeld wasn't portrayed as German, or a scientist, though he did employ someone who was both called Professor Dr. Metz, who might be based on von Braun. I might just change it. Sheavsey33 (talk) 12:53, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Wernher von Braun and Waffen-SS

There is a contradictory statement concerning the SS membership of von Braun in Bornemann "Geheimprojekt Mittelbau". It states: "Am 21. Februar 1944 schlug Reichsführer SS Himmler Professor v. Braun vor, vom Heer zur SS überzutreten. Sein Plan: Dornberger isolieren, von Braun danach kaltstellen und Kammler einschalten. Doch Wernher von Braun gab dem Reichsführer SS einen Korb." (In February 1944 Reichsführer SS Himmler suggested that Professor v. Braun may quit the military membership and join the SS. His plan: isolating Dornberger, ignoring Braun later and pushing Kammler. But von Braun refused the offer.) After the "Hitler Attentat" the power struggle between the military and the SS was decided and the military got converted to SS in 1944. Bornemann: "Damit war Anfang August 1944 Peenemünde in die Hände der SS gefallen und der Machtkampf um die Rakete entschieden." (So at the beginning of August 1944 the SS were in control of Peenemünde and the rocket.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.210.156.22 (talk) 18:02, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

von Braun's scientific credibility

A few weeks ago, a recent article in Der Spiegel asserted that von Braun was a better marketer of himself rather than any scientist or engineer to begin with. The reason his thesis was classified at least up until 1945, the article says, was that it was so bad, and only consisted of a few pages typed up in a matter of two days or so. As much as I remember the article to make it out, said "thesis" consisted mainly of an application for research money in order to fund rocketry building and testing, and the superior who had requested it said he could better justify giving him the staff and funds to his higher-ups if von Braun had a Ph.D., so he just called said application a "thesis" and gave von Braun a Ph.D. for it.

The article was based mainly on the recently published auto-biography of a member of von Braun's team both at Peenememünde and in the US and who by other members was described as the man doing the real work for poser von Braun, but also added some quote from an authentic late-30s or early-40s letter by one of von Braun's superiors where he commented on von Braun's continuing utter incompetence in the field of engineering and even just its theoretical and pratical 101's, "but at the end of the day, the child [von Braun] talked me into letting him play with his toys for another day". --79.193.41.113 (talk) 15:35, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

NASA and Weaponized Ballistic Rockets

von Braun Trained American Rocket Scientists for carrying weaponized payloads.

While working on the Saturn V rocket, von Braun taught at the Florida Institute of Technology, a top research and development institute designed as a feeder to NASA, on how to weaponize rockets with a lethal payload. For this, von Braun received recognition in the Florida Institute of Technology (Florida Tech) commencement address: see, Wernher von Braun Florida Institute of Technology http://www.fit.edu/graduation/documents/graduation_prog-spring11.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.204.13.246 (talk) 18:54, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

two different causes of death

At the end of the article, in two separate paragraphs, two different causes of death are given: kidney cancer and pancreatic cancer. One of them is obviously wrong. Unfortunately, I do not know the right answer, please, someone should correct it. (From a pure medical point of view, considering the level of cancer treatment back in the seventies, pancreatic cancer would have killed him much faster. But it is only my opinion.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EdgarBrazda (talk • contribs) 10:38, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I see no inconsistency. It says he was diagnosed with kidney cancer in 1973, and then that he died of pancreatic cancer. Renal cell carcinomas are known to be among the most common causes of metastases to the pancreas (see http://bjr.birjournals.org/content/71/851/1208.full.pdf). It would, however, be nice if the article explicitly made the connection (if that is indeed known). Whatthefat (talk) 20:42, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Interestingly however, if you were to pose the question: what kind of cancer would a person who spent many years round rockets and rocket fuels get, renal cell carcinoma (i.e. 'kidney cancer') would jump out as a biggie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.161.195 (talk) 13:27, 27 December 2011 (UTC)