Active radar seeker on RIM-8 "Talos"

Dilandu

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
80
Reaction score
10
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
Basically the idea: could the RIM-8 "Talos" surface-to-air missile be equipped with AN/DPN-53 active radar seeker derivative (from CIM-10 Bomarc)?

RIM-8 "Talos" missile system provide USN with long-range SAM capabilities not surpassed (in therms of range) until 2010s, but it have several crucial drawbacks. One of the most important was the limited numbers of targets, that could be engaged simultaneously. For each intercept, two radars were required: relatively compact AN/SPW-2 to guide the missile near the target, and enormous AN/SPG-49 to illuminate the target. The fire control system was bulky (especially the AN/SPG-49), and could not deal with saturation attacks.

An attempt to solve this problem with "Typhon" combat system - capable to engage multiple targets simultaneously on long ranges - was unsuccessful due to extremely complicated nature of the radar used and missile control. But maybe the simpler (at least intermediate) solution were possible? If "Talos" was equipped with active radar seeker, and thus made capable of autonomous homing on target, the problem could be simplified greatly: basically, you would need to get missile close enough to target, so the missile could then home on by itself. No need to illuminate targets on extreme ranges for missile to home on reflected signal.

The active radar seeker suitable for that already existed: the AN/DPN-53 doppler system, used on USAF CIM-10 Bomarc pilotless interceptor. Since the USN have plans to use this seeker on AAM-N-10 "Eagle" air-to-air missile (developed in 1958-1960) it seems at least theoretically possible to fit the AN/DPN-53 on "Talos". The maximum diameter of AAM-N-10 was supposed to be about 14 inches; the innerbody of "Talos" was at least 22 inches in diameter.



Such upgrade would allow "Talos" to be fired without a need for terminal guidance - greatly improving the ability to engage multiple targets simultaneously. Of course, the midcourse guidance would still be a limiting factor, but it could be potentially improved, too (A SCANFAR based command guidance seems a good possibility).

So, could it be done in late 1950s - early 1960s?
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,640
Reaction score
132
Space was already spoken for:

614862
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,640
Reaction score
132
That's tiny considering all the gear in addition to the scanner.

614866

614867

614868
 

Dilandu

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
80
Reaction score
10
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
That's tiny considering all the gear in addition to the scanner.
Hm. If I understood correctly, the radar seeker itself is much more compact than the whole electronic section of "Bomarc". Let's not forget, Navy planned to put the derivative of the same radar into 3-meter long AA missile (and still have space for solid fuel sustainer & warhead).

Also must point out, that when "Talos" missiles were rebuild into "Vandal" targets, they were elongated by about 4 ft without much problems.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,640
Reaction score
132
That's tiny considering all the gear in addition to the scanner.
Hm. If I understood correctly, the radar seeker itself is much more compact than the whole electronic section of "Bomarc". Let's not forget, Navy planned to put the derivative of the same radar into 3-meter long AA missile (and still have space for solid fuel sustainer & warhead).

Also must point out, that when "Talos" missiles were rebuild into "Vandal" targets, they were elongated by about 4 ft without much problems.
"Derivative". Also you didn't mention, "stretch however much to stuff it in there". Which begs the question, why even bother asking if it were possible?
 

Dilandu

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
80
Reaction score
10
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
"Derivative". Also you didn't mention, "stretch however much to stuff it in there". Which begs the question, why even bother asking if it were possible?
...Because I'm not completely sure that it is possible & cost-effective. Seriously, why any discussion existed? Exactly to discuss.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
11,640
Reaction score
132
"Derivative". Also you didn't mention, "stretch however much to stuff it in there". Which begs the question, why even bother asking if it were possible?
...Because I'm not completely sure that it is possible & cost-effective. Seriously, why any discussion existed? Exactly to discuss.
Well then your best bet would be to forget BOMARC and just stick Eagle's seeker in Talos. (But by the time you did that it would have been replaced by Typhon so. . .)
 

Dilandu

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
80
Reaction score
10
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
Well then your best bet would be to forget BOMARC and just stick Eagle's seeker in Talos. (But by the time you did that it would have been replaced by Typhon so. . .)
Basically what I said above:

Since the USN have plans to use this seeker on AAM-N-10 "Eagle" air-to-air missile (developed in 1958-1960) it seems at least theoretically possible to fit the AN/DPN-53 on "Talos".
Okay, must admit that I accidentally omitted the word "derivative".
 
Top