Bomarc fans will appreciate this.

[sferrin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRhpjTj36A0

DVD to come. Also shows X-10 in flight.

http://www.rocket.aero/

 

[Lee]

According to this site, another chat blog, featuring about halfway down this page:

http://gravityloss.wordpress.com/2008/01/23/hypersonic-cruise-for-the-v-prize/

The Bomarc they discuss disintegrated at Mach 6 after passing Mach 5.5 at 40,000 ft.---and it was still accelerating.

Those particular ramjets were said to be designed for only Mach 3.5. Maybe kind of embarrassing to both engineers and top military brass at the time?

 

[mz]

The Mach 5 missile was the much later 1980 Martin Marietta ASALM, not the fifties Boeing Bomarc. The Marquardt engined (similar to Bomarc's engines) Lockheed X-7 test missile reached Mach 4.5 in the fifties in a test flight. It was an air launched missile.

I think mixup between Bomarc and ASALM.

http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/asalm.html
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-10.html
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-60.html


Someone with good info on Bomarc can of course say what the maximum speeds attained were...

 

[Archibald]

According to le Fana de l'aviation of June 2001 top speed was around mach 3.45, not much (well it's already impressive!)

X-7 mach 4.31

ASALM mach 5.5 is mentionned in Andre Parsh website (designation systems)

 

[Lee]

"...X-7 mach 4.31..."

You're right. The experimental missile went that fast in a flight test with a really good-sized engine.




"ASALM mach 5.5 is mentioned in Andre Parsh website (designation systems)"

Below is a large .PDf that goes into some of the history of ramjets. But you're also right. ASALM was something different than BOMARC. There is actually conflicting information on the Internet(nothing new), but that other information said the BOMARC went that fast using good engines, but not great big engine on a massive missile like that.

Here's the .PDF:
194 pp. and 6.92 megabytes


http://amelia.db.erau.edu/nasacds/200712Disc1/research/20070035924_2007036871.pdf

 

[Boxman]

This Boeing produced film ("Supersonic Guardian") about the BOMARC was just posted by the San Diego Air & Space Museum on YouTube two days ago. The film features BOMARC launches, a brief explanation of ths SAGE system, and some great B-17 target drone footage of inert warhead BOMARC's passing within striking distance. Also, as in the earlier posted clip, some X-10 footage as well (4 min. 50 sec. mark).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIStR5LF7pw

 

[robunos]

Here's the .PDF:
194 pp. and 6.92 megabytes

I get '403 Forbidden', when i try the link.........

 

[Pem Tech]

Here's the .PDF:
194 pp. and 6.92 megabytes

I get '403 Forbidden', when i try the link.........

Same here....

 

[Orionblamblam]

Same here....

Try here:

http://hdl.handle.net/2060/20070035924

Or

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20070035924&hterms=facing+the+heat+barrier+facing+the+heat+barrier&qs=Ntx%3Dmode%2520matchallany%7Cmode%2520matchany%26Ntk%3DAll%7CAll%26Ns%3DLoaded-Date%7C1%26N%3D0%26No%3D10%26Ntt%3Dfacing%2520the%2520heat%2520barrier%7C%2522facing%2520the%2520heat%2520barrier%2522

 

[robunos]

Thanks, OBB... once again, you da man!.......




cheers,
Robin.

 

[Grey Havoc]

It's easy when he has his cats doing all his spying for him:

Perhaps we should start calling OBB, 'Warlock'?

 

[Grey Havoc]

And, in other news, the Pentagon has called in this fellow to counter those pesky feline spies:

(First photo)

 

[Sea Skimmer]

Has anyone ever found diagrams of what the original clamshell door launcher shown in the video looked like on the inside? I’ve found diagrams in manuals for the Model II/III/IV launchers actually used for the combat bases, but never the original test launcher which was ultimately rejected as too expensive but supposedly possessed considerably greater resistance to atomic blast.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Via an article linked to in a MilitaryPhotos.net thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=06drBN8nlWg