• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Project ISINGLASS & Project RHEINBERRY

Dynoman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
774
Reaction score
43
Excellent find!

Information on Project Rheinberry (Advanced Aircraft Program) as a follow-on to Isinglass.
 

blackstar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,682
Reaction score
12
sublight is back said:
Don't know if anybody has seen this before but the CIA just put up some ISINGLASS docs in the last two weeks.
If you look at the date on the top of that document, it was declassified in 2011. I've had that and a bunch of other ISINGLASS documents since then (well, probably 2012) and have written some articles about them. I think some of the articles are linked elsewhere in this thread. (If you look at my August 30, 2013 post here, I was discussing that document and what it said about RHEINBERRY vs. ISINGLASS.) That and the other ISINGLASS documents were released as part of the CREST collection at the National Archives. Now much of the CREST collection is available to the public via the CIA's website.

Unless they have put new ISINGLASS documents onto the site that have been declassified in the past year, all the material you find in that CIA site has been publicly available for 4+ years. But I'm pretty much the only person who has been writing about it. So I'm going to be a wet blanket and say that there is not anything previously unknown, it is just easier for individuals to access the documents now. I go out to the Archives regularly (where that collection was kept) and I have not seen any new and interesting documents on R or I in the past few years, maybe even since that one above.

Sadly, there is almost nothing on the technology. It's mostly memos about the program.
 

Dynoman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
774
Reaction score
43
There's more.... ;) Albeit, the technological data is lacking. Unfortunately, I think this is in the hands of the contractor, i.e. McDonnell Douglas (now a part of Boeing). I noticed when I sent a FOIA request to the CIA they omitted the "manned drawings" of ISINGLASS, leading me to believe that their interest in boost-glide vehicles surpassed the stillborn ISINGLASS project.

The other data I have is from NRO and USAF FOIA requests.
 

Dynoman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
774
Reaction score
43
Here's an interesting drawing that shows the general location of the cockpit and ejection clearance.
 

Attachments

Dynoman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
774
Reaction score
43
Earlier discussions in this thread centered on General Dynamics involvement in the ISINGLASS effort. Here a pre-approval contract is written with the CIA's technical representative, John Parangosky (of CIA airborne recon aircraft fame), to General Dynamics to redirect their study of an advanced airframe under the program line ISINGLASS, dated June 3, 1964.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP67B00074R000500100003-9.pdf
 

Dynoman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
774
Reaction score
43
This implies that GD was conducting a study similar to ISINGLASS, before ISINGLASS got underway, and may have been funded to examine the application of their design to the boost-glide reconnaissance concept (i.e. possibly GD's VL-3A design, which has been written as the first boost-glide design in AIAA by Lynch).
 

antigravite

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
677
Reaction score
12
Dynoman said:
This implies that GD was conducting a study similar to ISINGLASS, before ISINGLASS got underway, and may have been funded to examine the application of their design to the boost-glide reconnaissance concept (i.e. possibly GD's VL-3A design, which has been written as the first boost-glide design in AIAA by Lynch).
For what it's worth:

R. LYNCH, GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP., GENERAL DYNAMICS/CONVAIR, SAN DIEGO, CALIF.
"The first manned lifting entry vehicle configuration", 3rd Annual Meeting, Annual Meeting, 29 November 1966 - 02 December 1966
http://dx.doi.org/10.2514/6.1966-959
http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/10.2514/6.1966-959

(document not shown in full, first page only)

A.
 

Dynoman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
774
Reaction score
43
Yes, these two images are from the CIA's CREST site.
 

XP67_Moonbat

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
2,154
Reaction score
11
Man, I Prof Cszyz was still with us to provide a little feedback on that. :-/
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
205
NAVY PROJECT JANE as untaken alternative to ISINGLASS
B-52 vs B-58 as a carrier aircraft pro&contra internal discussion
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP62B00844R000200130070-2.pdf
 

blackstar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,682
Reaction score
12
flateric said:
NAVY PROJECT JANE as untaken alternative to ISINGLASS
B-52 vs B-58 as a carrier aircraft pro&contra internal discussion
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP62B00844R000200130070-2.pdf
I think that JANE and ISINGLASS were different time periods. This document dates from 1959. ISINGLASS was mid-1960s.
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,169
Reaction score
26
There has to be almost enough information out there now to produce a decent conversion kit for a B-52G/H. If only there was someone on the forum who had some experience in that area...
 

Dynoman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
774
Reaction score
43
The pictures above that I posted are from a document titled: Reconnaissance Vehicle Concept Study for FY1968.

The presentation material is at the end of the document.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP71B00822R000100070040-7.pdf
 

Dynoman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
774
Reaction score
43
Some additional data that is from McDonnell Douglas regarding boost glide performance and stability & control of an ISINGLASS type vehicle (ISINGLASS nor Model 192 are directly mentioned, however the drawings appear to be that of Model 192).

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP71B00265R000200130015-9.pdf
 

newsdeskdan

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
791
Reaction score
118
antigravite said:
Dynoman said:
ISINGLASS Model 192 from CIA presentation.
Hi for the sake of information contextualization / archival intent, here is the page extract wherein this outlined artwork appears.

A.
I liked the table which shows rad count from a Galosh near-miss and its effects on the crew/mission.
 

blackstar

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
1,682
Reaction score
12
Dynoman said:
The pictures above that I posted are from a document titled: Reconnaissance Vehicle Concept Study for FY1968.

The presentation material is at the end of the document.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP71B00822R000100070040-7.pdf
Note that this document is not ISINGLASS. ISINGLASS was canceled by that time. On page 2 it states that this study should take into account earlier work, including work done on ISINGLASS.

There are several words deleted at the bottom of page 1 and the top of page 2. It is possible that the deleted stuff at the bottom of page 1 is "General Dynamics" If you look farther down on page 2 they have deleted some contractor names, including the contractor that built the F-111. (duh)
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,781
Reaction score
205
...
 

Attachments

Meteorit

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
428
Reaction score
5
blackstar said:
Dynoman said:
https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP71B00822R000100070040-7.pdf
Note that this document is not ISINGLASS. ISINGLASS was canceled by that time. On page 2 it states that this study should take into account earlier work, including work done on ISINGLASS.

There are several words deleted at the bottom of page 1 and the top of page 2. It is possible that the deleted stuff at the bottom of page 1 is "General Dynamics" If you look farther down on page 2 they have deleted some contractor names, including the contractor that built the F-111. (duh)
One should note that the PDF actually contains three documents lumped together:
1. "Reconnaissance Vehicle Concept Study for Fiscal Year 1968" (PDF pages 1 - 3)
2. "Assessment of the factors affecting advanced lifting entry vehicles" (4 - 35)
3. Survivability presentation (36 - 64)

And that last part which is the most interesting and contains the posted graphics uses "Model 192" throughout, so it should actually be about ISINGLASS.
 

Meteorit

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
428
Reaction score
5
Dynoman said:
Here's an interesting drawing that shows the general location of the cockpit and ejection clearance.
May I ask for the source of this drawing (presuming it comes from the FOIA ERR)?
 

Dynoman

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
774
Reaction score
43
Meteorit, you can find that picture in the CIA document Flight Control of the Model 192

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP71B00265R000200130005-0.pdf
 

Meteorit

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 5, 2006
Messages
428
Reaction score
5
Thank you.
Too bad there doesn't seem to be front/cross-sectional views of Model 192 found so far. The NRO report earlier in this thread has cross-sections from nose up to the recce equipment bay, but not further back.
 

Mark Nankivil

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 13, 2007
Messages
1,530
Reaction score
146
Good Day All -

We received a treasure trove of goodies from a retired McAir engineer yesterday and amongst all of the photos and documents was the attached print of what appears to be the Mach 12 demonstrator. I found the negatives as well and will scan them when I get back from our family trip.

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 

Attachments

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,394
Reaction score
161
shockonlip said:
LowObservable said:
One question about Isinglass still puzzles me: The engine seems huge for an air-launched vehicle. Mulready's book gives a loaded weight of 132,000 pounds, but that seems pretty massive even for a B-52, particularly asymmetrically carried, and still won't allow a lot of burn time on a 250K engine. And if you're launching at altitude, why do you need the two-position nozzle?

Is it possible that an early version of Isinglass was smaller and air-launched, but that it was ground-launched by the time the development work was under way?
So I have a few moments to do this.
Looks interesting !

Looking at BlackStar's .pdf from earlier (very quickly). Fig 29 says at altitude Isp is 440 secs at 30K-200K ft.
(booster config - think that is the two position nozzle config - not sure though - haven't read the whole thing yet - Thanks BlackStar!)
g = 32 ft/sec**2
Mf = Mass fully fuelled is 132,000 lbs (given from Mulready)
Me = Mass empty (structure, wings, electronics, dudes flying it, landing gear, etc) 40,000 lbs (just guessing).

DeltaV = Isp (secs) * g (ft/sec**2) * ln(Mf/Me) = DeltaV ft/sec
DeltaV = 440 secs * 32 ft/sec**2 * ln(132000/40000) = 16,810 ft/sec
Approx Mach 16.8
NotMach 22.We have to go lower for Me.

So what empty weight gives around Mach 22?

That would be around 27,650 lbs as:
DeltaV = 440 secs * 32 ft/sec**2 * ln(132000/27650) = 22,000 ft/sec= Approx Mach 22

So say you launch at 30,000 ft from B-52.
I think that this vehicle could add some lift (due to its lifting surface) and the rocket could
also potentially be burned if the B-52 could carry that extra fuel (they looked at this for the
M/D-21 as well). May burn the B-52's tail off though - :)

So you could go from essentially standstill (B-52's speed) to Mach 22 with the above Isp and
Mass Ratio according to the Ideal Rocket Equation (just a back of the envelope calc.)
rocket equation applied to ISINGLASS
9.81*450*ln(132770/24450)=7469 m/s

not included: air launch from the b52 +900 m/s

so 8369 m/s - so close from earth orbit (9400 m/s) but not quite!

maybe they should reconsider fluorine: raising isp to 500 seconds would bridge the gap. Space shuttle here we go !!

replace the b52 with a 747 (more practical) with ISINGLASS clung underwing Launcher One style.
 
Top