Register here

Author Topic: Blue Water  (Read 27513 times)

Offline starviking

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 910
Blue Water
« on: November 30, 2006, 03:14:55 am »
Does anyone have information on the "Blue Water" tactical nuclear missile that was developed for the British Army in the 60's?

IIRC it was an English Electric design.

Starviking

Offline Sentinel Chicken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 576
  • American 71 Heavy, contact departure 126.47
    • TAILS THROUGH TIME: Short Trips on the Long Road of Aviation History
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #1 on: December 03, 2006, 05:21:16 pm »
I thought Blue Water was a nuclear-tipped ASM for the TSR.2?

Offline starviking

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 910
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #2 on: December 03, 2006, 07:22:57 pm »
I thought Blue Water was a nuclear-tipped ASM for the TSR.2?

There was a proposal to modify the Blue Water SSM for carriage on the TSR-2 as a ASM, I don't know if that reached hardware stage, I think the SSM did.

Starviking

Offline slmvbs

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 10
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2006, 01:36:39 pm »
Hi you may find these links of interest -

http://www.skomer.u-net.com/projects/bluewater.htm   - possibly the best site for british missile projects data

http://users.tpg.com.au/eedeuce/  - this site is likely to give some background to early development methods but i havent had time to check it out in full

also you may want to check ITN Source for British Pathe newsreels of the period and the following papers held at the national archive at Kew: Department of Scientific and Industrial Research: Aeronautical Research Council: Reports and Papers DSIR 23/30270
Test in 8 x 8 ft wind tunnel on a cruciform moving wing guided weapon: English Electric BLUE WATER (RAE Rep Aero 2664) .Date: 1963 and Ministry of Housing and Local Government and predecessors and successor: New Towns, General Registered Files (NT Series) HLG 116/127 Cancellation by English Electric Co of Blue Water nuclear missile project: effect on Stevenage; deputation to Minister Date: 1962.
http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/search/quick_search.aspx






Offline starviking

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 910
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #4 on: December 14, 2006, 05:01:49 am »
Thanks slmvbs,

I'll start checking!

Starviking

Offline PMN1

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 665
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2010, 01:22:00 pm »
Does anyone know what the planned range of the air-launched version would have been?

Offline cardonet

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 70
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2010, 02:04:18 pm »
You may find this link of interest

http://fuseurop.univ-perp.fr/bwater_e.htm

Offline RLBH

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 168
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #7 on: January 13, 2010, 01:35:52 pm »
Does anyone know what the planned range of the air-launched version would have been?

Obviously, this depends heavily on the launch conditions. Using the simulator in this thread and the data from cardonet's link, I get a range of approximately 125 nautical miles from a launch at 35,000 feet and Mach 0.9. I should stress, that is approximate, and varies quite considerably with the launch conditions.

Offline alertken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 507
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #8 on: January 14, 2010, 04:05:45 pm »
sv: UK digested V1 (as "Menace") but chose in 1947 to abandon such things as being bereft of military purpose. In April,1957 Defence Minister Sandys, he that chopped much, having inherited a 31/5/56 intent to acquire 100 Corporal F for the British Army of the Rhine, funded a UK replacement SSM. The issue was that Corporal's W-7 warhead would be held by USArmy at Dortmund, to be trucked to the Royal Artillery if/when POTUS so determined. Sandys' SSM's warhead was to be indigenous, from the Aldermaston AWR Establishment already overloaded trying to deliver fission devices while grasping how to do fusion. Blue Fox/Indigo Hammer (6KT) was tested 9/57, intended for Blue Water, (ex-Blue Slug) Seaslug 2 SSM and Blue Envoy/Bloodhound 3 SAM. EE(GW) Stevenage was Sister Firm on Corporal, Prime Contractor on Blue Water.

On 4 August, 1958 he made the UK/US Agreement for Co-operation on Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes. That ended UK's expensive attempts at nuclear design independence. With great relief UK moved to licenced/adaptation of US designs; Indigo Hammer lapsed. Corporal would be replaced in 1962 with 100 Douglas MGR-1B Honest John, also with W-7, also with EE(GW) as Sister Firm...yet in 8/1958 Blue Water continued. From its access to US data, AWRE was to attempt a "UK" warhead, so that BAOR could deploy a replacement for Honest John, to fire at London's, not Washington's Command.

In December,1960 Skybolt, core of "independent" UK Deterrence, was chopped. PM Macmillan secured Polaris. Dual key warhead controls were to govern Bundeswehr Honest Johns, too: US urged Sperry MGM-29A Sergeant SSM on everybody to “the tune of umpteen Mn.$”; UK declined as this was “not a European rocket. It’s a racket of US industry.” Mac was disingenuous on Blue Water: “a better weapon (but in 1962 it was still paper; political pressure on European NATO Nations to take Sergeant) was irresistible (on) favourable terms more common (for) washing machines (forcing) us to cancel (10/8/62) at considerable loss.” Mac, Memoirs/VI, P335. FRG took Sergeant; BAOR kept Honest John to 1976, then deployed 60 Vought MGM-52C Lance to 1992, US warheads for all at Dortmund.

Blue Water SSM's warhead was to have been a variant within genus WE.177, whose prime manifestation was to have been as TSR.2's gravity bomb. It is not clear that schemes for an (ex-EE) BAC Blue Water ASM for TSR.2 had funding or a warhead after (or indeed before) 8/62: PMN1's range Q may not have an A based on more than a sketch. (ex-Bristol) BAC ramjet X-12 Pandora ASM did have R&D funding, but no warhead, because, despite Strategic Deterrence going sub-surface, RAF blagged funds to retain a Task for a big gravity bomb. AWRE invented fusion WE.177B (deployed 9/1966, Vulcan B.2), which delayed/deferred fission WE.177A (deployed 6/1970 RN, 2/71 RAF Buccaneers). Blue Water/WE.177 would have been yet later; a "UK" warhead derived from US data could not have been supplied by UK to any export Customer, so total production would have been an expensive run of 60-100 for BAOR. So, chop Blue Water, enjoy washing machine terms for HJ, later Lance, inter-operable with, though subservient, to Allies.

Offline Spark

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 361
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2010, 02:58:34 am »
sv: UK digested V1 (as "Menace") but chose in 1947 to abandon such things as being bereft of military purpose. In April,1957 Defence Minister Sandys, he that chopped much, having inherited a 31/5/56 intent to acquire 100 Corporal F for the British Army of the Rhine, funded a UK replacement SSM. The issue was that Corporal's W-7 warhead would be held by USArmy at Dortmund, to be trucked to the Royal Artillery if/when POTUS so determined. Sandys' SSM's warhead was to be indigenous, from the Aldermaston AWR Establishment already overloaded trying to deliver fission devices while grasping how to do fusion. Blue Fox/Indigo Hammer (6KT) was tested 9/57, intended for Blue Water, (ex-Blue Slug) Seaslug 2 SSM and Blue Envoy/Bloodhound 3 SAM. EE(GW) Stevenage was Sister Firm on Corporal, Prime Contractor on Blue Water.

On 4 August, 1958 he made the UK/US Agreement for Co-operation on Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes. That ended UK's expensive attempts at nuclear design independence. With great relief UK moved to licenced/adaptation of US designs; Indigo Hammer lapsed. Corporal would be replaced in 1962 with 100 Douglas MGR-1B Honest John, also with W-7, also with EE(GW) as Sister Firm...yet in 8/1958 Blue Water continued. From its access to US data, AWRE was to attempt a "UK" warhead, so that BAOR could deploy a replacement for Honest John, to fire at London's, not Washington's Command.

In December,1960 Skybolt, core of "independent" UK Deterrence, was chopped. PM Macmillan secured Polaris. Dual key warhead controls were to govern Bundeswehr Honest Johns, too: US urged Sperry MGM-29A Sergeant SSM on everybody to “the tune of umpteen Mn.$”; UK declined as this was “not a European rocket. It’s a racket of US industry.” Mac was disingenuous on Blue Water: “a better weapon (but in 1962 it was still paper; political pressure on European NATO Nations to take Sergeant) was irresistible (on) favourable terms more common (for) washing machines (forcing) us to cancel (10/8/62) at considerable loss.” Mac, Memoirs/VI, P335. FRG took Sergeant; BAOR kept Honest John to 1976, then deployed 60 Vought MGM-52C Lance to 1992, US warheads for all at Dortmund.

Blue Water SSM's warhead was to have been a variant within genus WE.177, whose prime manifestation was to have been as TSR.2's gravity bomb. It is not clear that schemes for an (ex-EE) BAC Blue Water ASM for TSR.2 had funding or a warhead after (or indeed before) 8/62: PMN1's range Q may not have an A based on more than a sketch. (ex-Bristol) BAC ramjet X-12 Pandora ASM did have R&D funding, but no warhead, because, despite Strategic Deterrence going sub-surface, RAF blagged funds to retain a Task for a big gravity bomb. AWRE invented fusion WE.177B (deployed 9/1966, Vulcan B.2), which delayed/deferred fission WE.177A (deployed 6/1970 RN, 2/71 RAF Buccaneers). Blue Water/WE.177 would have been yet later; a "UK" warhead derived from US data could not have been supplied by UK to any export Customer, so total production would have been an expensive run of 60-100 for BAOR. So, chop Blue Water, enjoy washing machine terms for HJ, later Lance, inter-operable with, though subservient, to Allies.

Hi
,,,,and Black Rock?

Offline alertken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 507
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #10 on: January 17, 2010, 03:02:07 am »
B Rock: as Manuel said: I know nothing beyond Skomer's entry (undated SSM for Br.Army).

Offline Spark

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 361
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #11 on: January 17, 2010, 07:10:44 am »
B Rock: as Manuel said: I know nothing beyond Skomer's entry (undated SSM for Br.Army).
Hi alertken,
Black Rock; English Electric early field mobile nuclear tipped fast response surface to surface weapon with Westcott rocket motor and a range of 200miles. There was at least one solid propellant two stage missile proposal considered for Blue Streak this may have been an EE proposal but liquid propellants were considered best as Blue Streak always had a duality of purpose both as a missile but more important was the SLV part this certainly resulted in the EE Bristol/Westcott Delta 2 and Delta 3 work
 A lot of early UK work is still steeped in secrecy but ICI did ground breaking work in solids.
Note according to a Ministry document held at Kew Polaris was made possible because of ICI work in the field, this gives yet another twist to what we think of the history of the subject. As I understand it Black rock was started well before 54 and Blue Streak.
 May have finished with purchase of Corporal.

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #12 on: January 17, 2010, 08:26:50 am »
Spark,

Are you suggesting that the Delta 2 & 3 were intended as solid fuel motors?

Offline Spark

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 361
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2010, 12:06:50 am »
Spark,

Are you suggesting that the Delta 2 & 3 were intended as solid fuel motors?

Hi sealordlawrence,

No, both were LOX/K, only that EE had a fund of large solid experiance prior to BS.

Offline uk 75

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1214
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #14 on: January 18, 2010, 02:09:22 am »
In the entry for Blue Water in British Secret Projects 4 the usual
Bedford truck launch vehicle is shown.  However, there were also
proposals to mount Blue Water on the FV 432 tracked chassis and
the Alvis Stalwart amphibious vehicle.  West Germany was a prime
potential customer, but opted for Sergeant instead.  If the Germans
had bought Blue Water they might have fitted to it to one of their
own vehicles.
Senior British Army commanders were not all enthusiastic about
battlefield nuclear weapons (Lord Carver).  Corporal was never replaced
in service, while the Honest John had to wait until Lance arrived in the 70s.
Lance was quite a compact system but short ranged.

UK 75

Offline alertken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 507
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #15 on: January 18, 2010, 12:50:06 pm »
spark: Black Rock: tks. You are probably right that it faded with nearly-free Corporal.
English Electric Co.Ltd. in 1938 was a powerhouse (Ha!). The WW1 sites that had built aircraft were less relevant than their production engineering skills, in causing their selection as a "shadow" site, to build Hampden, Halifax, Vampire. That caused MAP/MoS to encourage them to buy Napier (1/43), Marconi (1946) and W.E.W Petter (9/44) to set up a DO and scheme a purejet Speed Bomber. RAE pimped GW in ’48, urging firms to “detach some of your best men to work on something which is a doubtful starter, politically vulnerable, and perhaps even unprofitable”. EE was awarded one of 3 (to be SAMs), as the sole vertically-integrated Prime, provided that they “would not have to put capital into the venture”. In practice remote from Group kin Napier (motor), Marconi (guidance), their reward at (ex-Napier) Luton was to “put up their own buildings - or more accurately (of MoS, funding in 1953) the operation”, adding a new Stevenage site, later core (to be)MBDA A.R.Adams,Good Company,BAC,1976,Pp4/28/61.

MoS (probably) funded study there after the 27 February 1950 US/UK (“Burns/Templer”)GW data Agreement resurrected British Army SSM interest; quite logically MoS invited EE(GW) to take on the IRBM in late-1954. Chairman Geo. (to be Lord)Nelson declined and DH Props. took it. Probably: Black Rock studies then lapsed; nevertheless, EE became SSM Sister Firm and Prime Contractor for Blue Water.

Offline Barrington Bond

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 927
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #16 on: January 18, 2010, 01:29:51 pm »
Stalwart/Blue Water in an ad in this thread.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4055.0/highlight,stalwart.html

Regards,
Barry
"It hasn't squeaked in a week!"

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #17 on: February 12, 2010, 08:49:08 am »
sv: UK digested V1 (as "Menace") but chose in 1947 to abandon such things as being bereft of military purpose. In April,1957 Defence Minister Sandys, he that chopped much, having inherited a 31/5/56 intent to acquire 100 Corporal F for the British Army of the Rhine, funded a UK replacement SSM. The issue was that Corporal's W-7 warhead would be held by USArmy at Dortmund, to be trucked to the Royal Artillery if/when POTUS so determined. Sandys' SSM's warhead was to be indigenous, from the Aldermaston AWR Establishment already overloaded trying to deliver fission devices while grasping how to do fusion. Blue Fox/Indigo Hammer (6KT) was tested 9/57, intended for Blue Water, (ex-Blue Slug) Seaslug 2 SSM and Blue Envoy/Bloodhound 3 SAM. EE(GW) Stevenage was Sister Firm on Corporal, Prime Contractor on Blue Water.

On 4 August, 1958 he made the UK/US Agreement for Co-operation on Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defense Purposes. That ended UK's expensive attempts at nuclear design independence. With great relief UK moved to licenced/adaptation of US designs; Indigo Hammer lapsed. Corporal would be replaced in 1962 with 100 Douglas MGR-1B Honest John, also with W-7, also with EE(GW) as Sister Firm...yet in 8/1958 Blue Water continued. From its access to US data, AWRE was to attempt a "UK" warhead, so that BAOR could deploy a replacement for Honest John, to fire at London's, not Washington's Command.

In December,1960 Skybolt, core of "independent" UK Deterrence, was chopped. PM Macmillan secured Polaris. Dual key warhead controls were to govern Bundeswehr Honest Johns, too: US urged Sperry MGM-29A Sergeant SSM on everybody to “the tune of umpteen Mn.$”; UK declined as this was “not a European rocket. It’s a racket of US industry.” Mac was disingenuous on Blue Water: “a better weapon (but in 1962 it was still paper; political pressure on European NATO Nations to take Sergeant) was irresistible (on) favourable terms more common (for) washing machines (forcing) us to cancel (10/8/62) at considerable loss.” Mac, Memoirs/VI, P335. FRG took Sergeant; BAOR kept Honest John to 1976, then deployed 60 Vought MGM-52C Lance to 1992, US warheads for all at Dortmund.

Blue Water SSM's warhead was to have been a variant within genus WE.177, whose prime manifestation was to have been as TSR.2's gravity bomb. It is not clear that schemes for an (ex-EE) BAC Blue Water ASM for TSR.2 had funding or a warhead after (or indeed before) 8/62: PMN1's range Q may not have an A based on more than a sketch. (ex-Bristol) BAC ramjet X-12 Pandora ASM did have R&D funding, but no warhead, because, despite Strategic Deterrence going sub-surface, RAF blagged funds to retain a Task for a big gravity bomb. AWRE invented fusion WE.177B (deployed 9/1966, Vulcan B.2), which delayed/deferred fission WE.177A (deployed 6/1970 RN, 2/71 RAF Buccaneers). Blue Water/WE.177 would have been yet later; a "UK" warhead derived from US data could not have been supplied by UK to any export Customer, so total production would have been an expensive run of 60-100 for BAOR. So, chop Blue Water, enjoy washing machine terms for HJ, later Lance, inter-operable with, though subservient, to Allies.

Ken,

D you know if the BAC X-12 R&D funding was private or from the MoD/Treasury?

Offline alertken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 507
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #18 on: February 13, 2010, 02:40:48 am »
MoS in 1958, then MoA, funding Bristol(GW), then BAC(GW) as Prime, embracing its Bristol ramjet. I think work did not proceed beyond bench bits; MoA encouraged BSEL to attend firstly to Odin for Sea Dart. There was no point in buying a UK-solo ASM for TSR.2 if resource conflicts in AWRE might cause us to fit a US warhead - take a better Bullpup. Schemes of Blue Water ASM fell in same category. Work ceased, with TSR.2, by April,1965; F-111K would carry lay-down stores.

There has been minuscule PV in UK GW due to Export Licence constraints on sales. Can think only of early work on Vickers Vigilant ATM; on Ferranti's (Rockwell AGM-130, ah, influenced) ASM, PGM-1/PGM-2 al Hakim, and on MBD's Scalp-derived Black Shaheen ASM, all taken up by UAE.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 02:45:05 am by alertken »

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #19 on: February 13, 2010, 05:04:05 am »
Thanks Ken,

Was the X-12 Pandora (or any other ASM for that matter) ever actually planned for the TSR-2, I was under the impression that the air launched Blue Water was never taken especially seriously and never received any funding. I thought that the only nuclear delivery option ever seriously considered for the TSR-2 was the twin internally carried WE177 free fall weapons with some consideration given to two additional external weapons following the 10kt tactical yield limit. Could TSR-2 have even lifted the X-12?

Beyond Blue Steel, Skybolt, and X-12 Pandora, did any other UK strategic stand-off missiles in the Cold War era receive any actual government funding or support? I am aware of the rather crude proposals bolt solid fuel rockets to WE177's and turn them into unguided ballistic missiles but realistically speaking these dont quite count!

And with yet another question, may I ask what your source is? One of my great criticisms of Gunton's work is his failure to discriminate between company sponsored paper sketches and actual government funded projects that underwent a degree of development work.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 05:07:52 am by sealordlawrence »

Online Geoff_B

  • The Scratchbuilding Demigod
  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 591
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #20 on: February 13, 2010, 07:03:17 am »
Lawrence

You should try and pick up the Paul Lucas TSR2 book as that covers the various missile proposals that were mooted bassed upon documented evidence from the archives. (Some certainly appear to be very silly  such as Slybolt and Polaris !!!)

However the restrictions of WE177 being a free fall bomb was noted and there were various developments for Air launched missiles to fit in or under TSR2 carrying a WE177 sized warhead. Paul's book covers them as does Chris Gibsons BSP:IV Missiles & Hypersonics. There was also proposals to have a nuclear variant of the Martel (Megaton Martel) as a method of stand off strike.

Cheers

Geoff

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #21 on: February 13, 2010, 07:27:48 am »
Thorvic,

I have BSPIV, although not the Paul Lucas TSR-2 book, the difficulty I have though is establishing which weapons were actually seriously considered and actually received funding. Megaton Martel for instance, seems to have been only a very basic discussion topic leading to the solid rocket powered, unguided, ballistic WE177 concept.

Offline elmayerle

  • Aerospace Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1199
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #22 on: February 13, 2010, 07:04:00 pm »
Thorvic,

I have BSPIV, although not the Paul Lucas TSR-2 book, the difficulty I have though is establishing which weapons were actually seriously considered and actually received funding. Megaton Martel for instance, seems to have been only a very basic discussion topic leading to the solid rocket powered, unguided, ballistic WE177 concept.
Could you please give a link for the Paul Lucas TSR-2 book?  Thanks.

Offline GTX

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2490
  • All hail the God of Frustration!!!
    • Beyond The Sprues
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #23 on: February 13, 2010, 08:39:32 pm »
Thorvic,

I have BSPIV, although not the Paul Lucas TSR-2 book, the difficulty I have though is establishing which weapons were actually seriously considered and actually received funding. Megaton Martel for instance, seems to have been only a very basic discussion topic leading to the solid rocket powered, unguided, ballistic WE177 concept.
Could you please give a link for the Paul Lucas TSR-2 book?  Thanks.

Evan, here you go:  http://www.amazon.com/BAC-TSR-2-Tomorrows-Eagle-Model/dp/0955185882

Regards,

Greg

Offline alertken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 507
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #24 on: February 14, 2010, 02:33:33 am »
SLL: sources. I was in the Engine R&D section of MoA 1963-66 involved in what was directly funded. Power for X-12 was not. It is highly improbable that significant metal for any of these unfamiliar schemes was ever cut (though I could be unaware of power exercises funded through the platform firm, or done in RPE Westcott, or dead already).

Ministers by 1963 (Tory, not Labour) had become petrified of UK GW squander. House of Commons 59/60 Public Accounts Committee had roasted MoA on Seaslug (begun in the 1947-1949 timeframe, (to be) deployed 1962: “effective financial control was exercised at no stage (A) completely sorry story” S.R.Twigge,Early Devt of GW in UK ’40-60,Harwood,93,P225. “Final cost exceeded initial estimates by a factor of 19” Sir R.Way,MoS,J.Bruce-Gardyne,N.Lawson (yes, Nigella's Dad, the future Chancellor of the Exchequer!),The Power Game,Macmillan,76,P25. The Deterrent had been entrusted in 1955 to Avro (GW) Blue Steel: “few (contracts caused) such bitter feelings (as) even in ’56 (Avro puffed 1,000n.m. The view in MoS was that if they) could not perfect (100n.m.) how could they (do) 10xthat? (Avro Weapons Research Divn, with many ex-RAE staff:) weak management structure (criticisms) recriminations (were) common parlance” H.Wynn,RAF Nuclear Deterrent Forces, HMSO,1994, P202/4. The fix, in January,59, was for UK to join the USAF Reqt., won in June by Douglas WS138A (to be GAM-87A, AGM-48) Skybolt ALBM. In the flurry after that was chopped, December,1962, those weird Slams listed in BSP/Hypersonics were mooted, but the solution was not kite dreams but a low-risk bigger bang on the US-derived gravity WE.177.

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #25 on: February 15, 2010, 11:51:29 am »
Ken,

Certainly the TSR-2 WE177B with Polaris in submarines seems like a pretty sensible solution to the UK nuclear delivery problem in the post V-Bomber period. Just to clarify, what do you mean by 'power funding'? Did the X12 ramjet get R&D funding or not?

Are you aware of any other UK strategic delivery proposals getting funding?

Thank you for your contribution, your knowledge and experience is most welcome indeed.

Offline Skyraider3D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 360
  • Aviation Artist
    • Skyraider's 3D Aviation Art
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #26 on: November 20, 2010, 03:30:20 pm »
Would anyone have a picture of the exhaust of the Blue Water missile by any chance?

www. A V I A T I O N A R T .aero
Please find my latest works on Facebook!

Offline Barrington Bond

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 927
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #27 on: November 21, 2010, 12:26:52 am »
What do you mean by exhaust? There is an advert of the time showing it in the air just after take-off but it's not particularly of high quality.

Regards,
Barry
"It hasn't squeaked in a week!"

Offline Skyraider3D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 360
  • Aviation Artist
    • Skyraider's 3D Aviation Art
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #28 on: November 22, 2010, 04:52:00 pm »
Yes, just the tail pipe. All pictures I have seen of the ground-launched Blue Water show it from the front, and all air-launched ones show it with a tail cone. I just like to know what the tail end looked like precisely (for 3D modelling purposes). The advert you mention might help.

www. A V I A T I O N A R T .aero
Please find my latest works on Facebook!

Online aircav

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 4
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #29 on: November 23, 2010, 10:42:41 am »
Is this any good ?

Offline Skyraider3D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 360
  • Aviation Artist
    • Skyraider's 3D Aviation Art
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #30 on: November 23, 2010, 02:34:27 pm »
Is this any good ?
Fantastic, 100% better than anything I've seen till now. Many thanks!


That raises another question... are there any Blue Water missiles preserved?

It would appear at least a Cuckoo rocket motor was:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_field/3701321062/
« Last Edit: November 23, 2010, 02:41:38 pm by Skyraider3D »

www. A V I A T I O N A R T .aero
Please find my latest works on Facebook!

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #31 on: December 04, 2010, 05:53:03 am »
According to: http://fuseurop.univ-perp.fr/bwater_e.htm

The Cuckoo would not have been used? Apparently something called Phoenix, but with a 17 or 24 inch motor?

That a Cuckoo has survived is not great surprise given how extensively the type was used in sounding and trials rockets before being replaced by Goldfinch.

http://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/physics/outreach/the-rockets-pages/skylark
« Last Edit: December 04, 2010, 06:13:09 am by sealordlawrence »

Offline Skyraider3D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 360
  • Aviation Artist
    • Skyraider's 3D Aviation Art
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #32 on: December 04, 2010, 06:52:27 am »
Thanks for the info!

www. A V I A T I O N A R T .aero
Please find my latest works on Facebook!

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #33 on: December 04, 2010, 11:39:00 am »
For a bit more history see this document, note how the range progressively increases. Also, the desire for a more powerful warhead, this may explain the experimental 24 inch rocket motor.

http://www.mcis.soton.ac.uk/Site_Files/pdf/nuclear_history/Working_Paper_No_1.pdf

Offline Skyraider3D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 360
  • Aviation Artist
    • Skyraider's 3D Aviation Art
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #34 on: December 05, 2010, 03:39:08 am »
Nice overview, thanks!

www. A V I A T I O N A R T .aero
Please find my latest works on Facebook!

Offline Barrington Bond

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 927
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #35 on: October 27, 2011, 07:06:35 am »
Bought this nice photo at an airfair earlier this year. :)
 
"It hasn't squeaked in a week!"

Offline Skyraider3D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 360
  • Aviation Artist
    • Skyraider's 3D Aviation Art
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #36 on: October 27, 2011, 07:11:49 pm »
Very nice photo indeed, thanks for showing!

www. A V I A T I O N A R T .aero
Please find my latest works on Facebook!

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #37 on: October 03, 2012, 12:49:41 pm »
Whilst looking for information about planned RAF Lightning squadrons I came across the following document which contains the conclusions of a meeting of the cabinet about the cancellation of Blue Water, it does not contain any surprises but it is interesting nonetheless.

Offline alertken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 507
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #38 on: October 09, 2012, 08:11:30 am »
Pols can be, ah, selective in their memories. Macmillan, Memoirs/VI,P335: (vice Douglas MGR-1B Honest John for France (yes, really!), Italy, FRG and UK, US urged Sperry MGM-29A Sergeant SSM to) “the tune of umpteen Mn.$”; UK declined “not a European rocket. It’s a racket of US industry.” BAC Blue Water was: “a better weapon (but pressure for Sergeant) was irresistible (on) favourable terms more common (for) washing machines (8/62 forcing) us to cancel at considerable loss” (£32.1Mn.)
 
In fact, once UK decided to restrict SSM deployment to BAOR, then inter-operation and free US warheads orphaned any UK-solo product. We perpetuated our HJs to 1977, then took Lance on the customary washing-machine deal.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2012, 08:13:01 am by alertken »

Offline fredgell

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 75
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #39 on: November 21, 2012, 09:24:04 am »
Everyone seen this?
http://specialistauctions.com/auctiondetails.php?id=1503182
'board room model'
 
Cheers
 
Fred

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #40 on: June 08, 2013, 04:43:08 pm »
MoS in 1958, then MoA, funding Bristol(GW), then BAC(GW) as Prime, embracing its Bristol ramjet. I think work did not proceed beyond bench bits; MoA encouraged BSEL to attend firstly to Odin for Sea Dart.

In one of the OR.1182 files in the PRO mention is actually made of a proposal to provide Bristol with a contract for R&D of the ramjet for the X-12, I have no idea if the proposal was adopted but it seems to have gone further than the rest of the affair. Interestingly the X-12 appears to double in weight in about 2 years.

I am left wondering whether it could have been made lighter using the BS.1013 integrated ramjet and the Shelldyne fuel of the later Grand Slam II...?

Offline CJGibson

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • TAATH is here
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #41 on: June 04, 2014, 02:24:47 am »
Have seen mention of the FV426 as a launcher for Blue Water. Anyone encountered this before? Have seen FV426 as a vehicle for Orange William, but this is new to me. It's on a list of cargo for the Britannic/HP.111/VC10.

Chris

Offline TsrJoe

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 252
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #42 on: June 04, 2014, 02:59:52 am »
there is a drawing of Blue water mounted upon a tracked chassis in one of the files at Kew, I do have a copy of it somewhere, I will see if I can dig it out

cheers, Joe
...'excuse me mister, is that plane for real'...!!!

IPMS (UK) 'Project Cancelled' SIG. co,co-ordinator
IPMS (UK) 'TSR-2', 'Cold War' & 'What-if' SIG. Member

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #43 on: June 04, 2014, 03:19:57 am »
I doubt this helps, but maybe, one of the things I have learnt looking through the file at Kew is that FVRDE would look at every conceivable chassis for a new missile programme and there seems to have been something of a disconnect between FVRDE and the missile people- there is a fascinating FVRDE study about PT.428, suffice to say they didn't like it.

Offline CJGibson

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1090
  • TAATH is here
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #44 on: June 04, 2014, 02:09:02 pm »
I've seen 'Tracked Blue Water launcher" before on a list of Belfast cargo options but always assumed it to be on a FV432 chassis, but this FV426 came as a bit of a surprise.

I wonder what prompted the change from a tracked TEL to the Bedford wheeled TEL.  Ease of movement around West Germany's excellent roads?

Chris

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #45 on: June 04, 2014, 03:50:49 pm »
I wonder what prompted the change from a tracked TEL to the Bedford wheeled TEL.  Ease of movement around West Germany's excellent roads?

Cost and weight as well. Kerb weight of a FV421 was 9 tons and a Bedford MK only 5 tons.
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline uk 75

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1214
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #46 on: June 05, 2014, 06:06:52 am »
I have a couple of questions on this excellent thread:
 
Was a Blue Water detachment ever proposed for the UK Strategic Reserve (3 Division)?
The US had Little John as a deployable SSM as well as Davy Crockett. Lance was also available in a trailer mounted version.
Blue Water seems quite a big missile system for a mobile force.
 
The tracked launcher picture would be very interesting.  The US deployed Pershing 1 on a tracked system but Sergeant was truck mounted (or was there also an M113 version)?
 
3 Division with Blue Water and PT428 tracked SAM would have been quite a force (After Suez a bit optimiistic to say the least).

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3148
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #47 on: June 05, 2014, 06:48:53 am »
First the obvious, the abandonment of the FV420 series in favour of FV432 would have course put a stop to the idea. Secondly, I cant see a significant requirement for sustained manoeuvre across rough ground. The same sort of mobility afford to logistics elements and towed artillery would be more than adequate.

Offline GTX

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2490
  • All hail the God of Frustration!!!
    • Beyond The Sprues
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #48 on: September 16, 2017, 02:10:32 pm »

Offline uk 75

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1214
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #49 on: October 28, 2017, 10:05:27 am »
The variant on the Alvis Stalwart would have been interesting, especially if PT 428 had ended up on the
same vehicle. They would have been equally useful in
BAOR and 3 Division.

Offline Arjen

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2103
  • It's turtles all the way down
Re: Blue Water
« Reply #50 on: October 29, 2017, 02:50:56 am »
« Last Edit: October 29, 2017, 02:56:33 am by Arjen »