260" SRM - as an ICBM

Yellow Palace

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
5 May 2007
Messages
936
Reaction score
1,465
Whilst looking for information on studies for 156" solid rockets applied to ICBMs, I came across this presentation on ATK's large motors. Buried in there is the notion of an ICBM using a 260" solid rocket motor for the first stage of an ICBM - no mention of what the second stage is, other than that it's solid. What really stands out is the throw weight of 110,000 pounds to 8,000 miles. :eek:
 

Attachments

  • 260-inch ICBM.png
    260-inch ICBM.png
    324.3 KB · Views: 671
RLBH - Great find I am hugely interested in US heavy ICBM programs - solid propellant - (Titan II was liquid of course) and why none were ever built let alone deployed. I have been looking for anything on the WS-120A and what configuration it might have been in but much of the information says, to paraphrase, no specific configurations were ever studied it was just going to be a "large solid fueled heavy ICBM carrying up to 20 RV's".

Please continue your search.
 
As far as 'sensible' heavy ICBMs are concerned, the only information I've found so far is the following:
Developed under a separate Golden Arrow investigation for a new hardened and dispersed missile, ICBM-X had a massive 156-inch diameter (Minuteman I was sixty-six inches at its widest), an unspecified number of stages, a CEP of .16 to .20 nautical miles, thixotropic propellants, a gross weight of 1,100,000 pounds, and multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs). Given a payload capacity of 24,000 pounds, this meant that it could have carried twenty or more MIRVs, a staggering number. Aerospace believed that it could not provide accurate cost figures for the superhardened ICBM-X weapon system, but construction efforts alone qualified the proposal as monumental architecture and made other options look relatively cheap
This is from a dissertation 'Echoes that Never Were: American Mobile Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, 1956-1983' by Steven Pomeroy and referenced in there to a document seemingly held at the Air Force Historical Research Agency, 'ICBM-X Missile System 156, Solid Propellant Configuration Thixotropic Propellant Configuration, December 16, 1964' from the Golden Arrow Technical Panel Systems Descriptions, Volume II.
 
RLBH said:
As far as 'sensible' heavy ICBMs are concerned, the only information I've found so far is the following:
Developed under a separate Golden Arrow investigation for a new hardened and dispersed missile, ICBM-X had a massive 156-inch diameter (Minuteman I was sixty-six inches at its widest), an unspecified number of stages, a CEP of .16 to .20 nautical miles, thixotropic propellants, a gross weight of 1,100,000 pounds, and multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRVs). Given a payload capacity of 24,000 pounds, this meant that it could have carried twenty or more MIRVs, a staggering number. Aerospace believed that it could not provide accurate cost figures for the superhardened ICBM-X weapon system, but construction efforts alone qualified the proposal as monumental architecture and made other options look relatively cheap
This is from a dissertation 'Echoes that Never Were: American Mobile Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles, 1956-1983' by Steven Pomeroy and referenced in there to a document seemingly held at the Air Force Historical Research Agency, 'ICBM-X Missile System 156, Solid Propellant Configuration Thixotropic Propellant Configuration, December 16, 1964' from the Golden Arrow Technical Panel Systems Descriptions, Volume II.
--------------------------
Do you have any of the papers mentioned?
 
I recall a plan for something called TABAS - "Total Air Base Attack System" - which required an ICBM with a conventional warhead of this sort of size, witha lot of kinetic penetrators to mess up runways etc.

I wonder why they never built it?
 
Wembley said:
I recall a plan for something called TABAS - "Total Air Base Attack System" - which required an ICBM with a conventional warhead of this sort of size, witha lot of kinetic penetrators to mess up runways etc.

I wonder why they never built it?

1: ICBMs are expensive
2: Because if you launch an ICBM, other people will see it and get twitchy. You might want to go muss up some dirt-world airport; some other power might decide it's a prelude to an all-out nuclear strike. Shazam! You just started World War V. Or WWIV, depending on your timeframe...
 
Another thing about TABAS; It's booster actually would have been a Saturn rocket (which apparently gained it the Army nickname of 'Incredible Hulk'). By the way, the 25-tonne kinetic energy penetrator payload was intended of being capable of taking out an entire airbase in one go.
 
Grey Havoc said:
Another thing about TABAS; It's booster actually would have been a Saturn rocket (which apparently gained it the Army nickname of 'Incredible Hulk'). By the way, the 25-tonne kinetic energy penetrator payload was intended of being capable of taking out an entire airbase in one go.

Are we talking a Saturn I, Ib or V or one of the derivatives such as the Saturn V INT-20 (S-Ic + S-IVb)?
 
Graham1973 said:
Are we talking a Saturn I, Ib or V or one of the derivatives such as the Saturn V INT-20 (S-Ic + S-IVb)?

It was implied to be a Saturn V derivative but I haven't been able to dig up anything more so far.
 
Back
Top Bottom