Unknown Grumman missile project

From Tony Buttler -

Unidentified missile. This model shows a missile project which I think most probably came from either Grumman or Republic. I am not a missile expert - does anyone know what it might be please?

Click to expand...

there Air intakes on top
is this a supersonic cruise missile ?

The design of the stand is exclusive to only one model shop: Grumman.

Possibly a Regulus competitor?

Are we sure it's a missile? The spine on top is rather odd for a missile, and it does lead to a very cockpit-like shape at the front. Note that the model displays no markings... so perhaps the cockpit canopy was to be shown via paint or decals that have not yet been applied.

And the wings are *huge* for any sort of post-WWII missile. Wings that big look like they're meant to allow the vehicle to land.

Preliminary work on the Republic F-103?

Northrop built the Snark, according to wikipedia there was a subsonic MX-775A and an unbuilt supersonic MX-775B. Northrop used a similar wingshape to the one used in this model in designing its unbuilt N-94 series (page 122 of Tony Buttler's own American Secret Projects Fighters and Interceptors)

<edit>And another big wing. Amazing site, Scott.http://up-ship.com/blog/?p=4234</edit>

Pica said:

Northrop built the Snark, according to wikipedia there was a subsonic MX-775A and an unbuilt supersonic MX-775B.

Click to expand...

This is nowhere near the Snark (MX-775A) or the Boojum (MX-775B) (see attachment for the latter).

I may not have made myself entirely clear. I agree that Boojum as illustrated on up-ship and in your post is a very different beast from the unidentified model. Andreas Parsch http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app1/ssm-a-5.html writes that several Boojum designs were made, but again, I agree that there is little similarity between the model and available Boojum designs. Apart from that big wing.

I noticed a wing shape I had seen earlier in Republic and Northrop designs. Orionblamblam noted that the model had a big wing, less appropriate in a cruise missile but more like an aircraft that was supposed to land again. That makes me wonder too.

One example of a big-winged cruise missile is the Snark, which had a related supersonic project. I could not find any references to Republic cruise missiles.

I may have put two and two together and come up with five. I am not claiming the model is a Northrop relic, just thinking out loud.

Having said all that: until today I did not even know about Boojum. More! Please! And can anybody identify the model?

<edit>Stargazer2006 has created a new topic summarizing all that can be found about Boojum on the web http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,11635.msg111108.html#new</edit>

The basic control and lift surface profile seems like an evolved version of the Bell Gam-63 Rascal - save the rear wings are much larger. Whilst I like the F-103 competitor idea myself - the size of the intakes seem a little small to my untrained eye. Perhaps there are intakes on the lower surface of the craft?

Any chance the cockpit area could be just to accommodate the controls for a long-range missile?

starviking said:

Any chance the cockpit area could be just to accommodate the controls for a long-range missile?

Click to expand...

The Soviet Buran and Burya ICCMs had little raised "cockpits" that contained navigational sensors such as star trackers and such, so it's possible. However, they were mounted further aft on the back of the vehicle for an uninterrupted view of the sky above; this vehicle has the "cockpit" mounted forward right on the nose, which would provide a good view forward and down-ish, but poor toward up-and-aft.

Orionblamblam said:

starviking said:

Any chance the cockpit area could be just to accommodate the controls for a long-range missile?

Click to expand...

The Soviet Buran and Burya ICCMs had little raised "cockpits" that contained navigational sensors such as star trackers and such, so it's possible. However, they were mounted further aft on the back of the vehicle for an uninterrupted view of the sky above; this vehicle has the "cockpit" mounted forward right on the nose, which would provide a good view forward and down-ish, but poor toward up-and-aft.

Click to expand...

There would be a cut out of the sky to aft because of the forward dorsal fin, but apart from that I don't see how the location of the 'cockpit' would interrupt the view of the sky compared to a Buran and Burya ICCM - in fact stick the cockpit in this bird aft and the forward dorsal fin and tailfin take cuts out of the sky - something that does not occur with the cockpit forward.

One other thing to throw into the mix - the diameter of the main body seems to vary pretty constantly - the cockpit seems to be almost 'tacked' on (fuel tanks in the fuselage?) It seems unlike most fighter designs, where the fuselage width was not much more than the cockpit width, save perhaps the Convair Sea Dart.

F-103 contender or US ICCM? Hmmmm.

starviking said:

There would be a cut out of the sky to aft because of the forward dorsal fin, but apart from that I don't see how the location of the 'cockpit' would interrupt the view of the sky compared to a Buran and Burya ICCM

Click to expand...

The top of the "cockpit" is flush with the top of the fuselage. This limits how far aft the sensor - be it a star tracker or Mark 1 Eyeball - can look, compared with how far forward it can look. A star-tracker navigational system doesn't really give a damn whether it's looking for or aft; but a human pilot would.

- the diameter of the main body seems to vary pretty constantly - the cockpit seems to be almost 'tacked' on

Click to expand...

True. Area ruling seems like it might not have been a big concern. But then, the fuselage of the F-103 was pretty simple and straight-sided as well.