Hey ! The Americans and Russians nicked the Bloodhound boosters !

phil gollin

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
19 September 2007
Messages
236
Reaction score
56
.


Didn't know which board to post this on (and it DOES look like they reused the Bloodhound boosters) ;






http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25929-own-the-recordbreaking-scramjet-nasa-and-russia-built.html#.U85GWvldWgQ




Own the record-breaking scramjet NASA and Russia built


(Image: Courtesy of the owner)In the market for a really fast ride? If so, 8 September may be your lucky day. Collectors looking to shell out for a major piece of aerospace history will have a chance to place their bids on this CIAM-NASA HFL "Kholod" scramjet, one of the fastest machines ever to fly.The first Kholod was launched by the Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM) in 1991, just weeks before the dissolution of the USSR. CIAM then joined forces with NASA and in 1998, the rocket flew at a record-breaking Mach 6.47 – nearly 8000 kilometres per hour. (Image: Courtesy of the owner)Nine Kholod rockets were made, but five were destroyed during test flights, so you're unlikely to feel the embarrassment of rolling up next to another one at a red light. As for how much this little beauty will cost you, we don't know – it's being sold in London without estimate or reserve.
.









 
Thats an S-200 SAM (ASCC SA-5 GAMMON) with its usual boosters. Not dissimilar to Bloodhound Mk II overall except it used a liquid fuel rocket sustainer not ramjets.
 

Attachments

  • SA-5 Gammon 03.jpg
    SA-5 Gammon 03.jpg
    345.1 KB · Views: 687
New Scientist isn't what it used to be. I gave them a slap on the wrist the other week for talking rubbish about UK nuclear weapons. I think the biologists have taken over.

Chris
 
CJGibson said:
New Scientist isn't what it used to be. I gave them a slap on the wrist the other week for talking rubbish about UK nuclear weapons. I think the biologists have taken over.

Along with the cosmologists. All this stuff about dark energy makes my head hurt... ???
 
CJGibson said:
New Scientist isn't what it used to be. I gave them a slap on the wrist the other week for talking rubbish about UK nuclear weapons. I think the biologists have taken over.

Chris

Don't get me started on their coverage of biology...

...journalistic cost cutting and aiming for audience over expertise seems to be pretty universal these days.
 
New Scientist have been publishing b+ll+cks for years - like the great Windscale/polonium scandal back in the 80s written by by a librarian from Newcastle.
 
Those types of boosters have been used by lots of missiles. In addition to Bloodhound and SA-5 there have been the following (and no doubt I've missed a few):

Fairchild Lark SAM-N-2 (opposing pair).
Thunderbird (4)
SA-4 Ganef (4)
Sea Slug (4)
The Chinese C-301 / HY-3 / CSS-C-6 / SAWHORSE (4)
Hsiung Feng 3 (uses an opposing pair)
Regulus 2 (used a single, ventral booster)
And there are a whole slew of missiles that use a ventral pair.
 
Convergent requirements bring convergent solutions. It's hardly surprising that different design teams in different nations would end up with much the same thing.


Also, if that's a SCRAMjet, where are the intakes? Looks more like a SCAMjet to me. :p
 
It's an anular inlet with a conical center body. Here's a frontal picture of Kholod that should make it clear.

kholod_12.jpg
 
I stand corrected.


The test equipment hooked up to the missile looks like something straight out of the 1950's!
 
In real life, the Boost motor technologies on Bloodhound came out of the USA in the first place (just as did the wing design and original ramjet design).
 
.


Did they ?


The British did a major technology transfer in the first three years of WW2 including double-base propellants (cordite) - used by the USN rockets, propellant presses (used by both USN and US Army, and the use of shaped cavities in solid propellants (invented 1935). I do agree that the US developed the asphalt based solid propellants which were transferred.
 
Back
Top Bottom