I've red a lot about that H2O2 stuff - and the record is definitively mixed and controversial.
Some points
- H2O2 needs to be 98% pure to get max specific impulse out of it (324 seconds is feasible)
- 85% or 90% instantly degrades the specific impulse to 280-290 seconds - although it improves handling and safety
- the purer the H2O2, the worst it reacts to impurities, including water vapor from the atmosphere
- The NF-104A (three built and flown for 8 years 1963-71) is typical of H2O2 mixed record
- It did not killed any pilot yet at some point in the late 1960's was a hangar queen because that H2O2 in the rocket created many structural issues
- H2O2 from 1945 to 1980 had some purity issues that led to severe accidents
- Yet from the moment it became part of hybrid rockets (besides solid fuel: AMROC, 1985) and then of Andrew Beal BA-2 project (1997), new manufacturing processes with more purity vastly improved H2O2 handling and safety

I have a whole bunch of documents on my HD if anybody is interested.

H2O2 was once my favorite "begnin" oxider for suborbital refueling rocketplanes; but since then I've learned about NYTROX which is a blend of N2O and LOX, lowering their freezings points (-183°C for LOX, -88°C for N2O). Nytrox could get a gentler -50°C without losing too much specific impulse.

But fact is that finding a non-deep-cryogenic, non-toxic, non-unstable oxidizer for rocketplanes is next to impossible. N2O sucks, H2O2 explodes, LOX is too cold, N2O4 is a corrosive and toxic b*tch of a substance. And with the aforementioned four, 90% of potential rocket oxidizers have been mentionned.
That list perfectly summarize the issue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Rocket_oxidizers
Ammonium dinitramide
Ammonium nitrate
Ammonium perchlorate

Chlorine pentafluoride
Chlorine trifluoride

Dinitrogen tetroxide (N2O4: storable hypergolic Ariane / Proton / Titan / Long March oxidizer)

Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)

Liquid oxygen (LOX)

Mixed oxides of nitrogen

Nitronium perchlorate
Nitrous oxide (N2O)

Oxygen difluoride

Perchloryl fluoride

Red fuming nitric acid

T-Stoff
Tetrafluorohydrazine
Tetranitromethane
Trinitramide

What is not storable / hypergolic (N2O4 and others) is horrible and murderous stuff (fluorine & "a good pair of running shoes" in the words of John Ignition Clark) .

And once all the nasty substances are removed, all that's left are the trio LOX (deep cryogen) H2O2 (unstable explosive bastard) and N2O (suck at performance, mild-cryogen, and killed three Virgin / Rutan / Scaled employees in July 2007).

That's why nytrox is interesting: it very much tries to blend LOX & N2O into a more begnin substance to compete with H2O2 as "alternative oxidizer to sacrosanct LOX".
 
Last edited:
Fully developed version of SR.53/SR.177:
Air Launch Maximum Ceiling: 157,700 metres
Maximum Speed: 5,852 kph / Mach 5.5 @ 25,400 metres

But the heat barrier may disagree...

In contrast with that, the altitude might be a touch more realistic, although 100 miles is quite enormous - moar than the X-15 !
 
Last edited:
Featuring Dick Stratton - Wonderful chap;- I had a hosted lunch (ie a group of us young aero engineers) with him in the early/mid eighties, unfortunately before I knew he was Chief Engineer on the 53/177. Form memory he mainly talked about his time on the Princess;- “one day I was twenty eight year old, drawing up a section of the flying controls and my boss asked;- Dick are you sure they’ll work ? So I replied that I had absolute confidence, to which he replied;- that’s good because we want someone like you on the first flight……. And that’s how I became the Princesse’s ‘chief stoker’ on its maiden flight a year or so later”
 
Last edited:
TRE 26/5/60.....?

Curious.
 
I wonder if we'll ever get to see photographs of the prototypes under construction before they were ignominiously junked as a result of that fool Duncan Sandy's short-sighted 1957 defence white paper?
 
Last I checked the Saunders-Roe corporate archive still exists but had been moved to deep storage and was not accessible. It cetainly contains multiple brochures and photos.
 
Ok had a read and quote curious it is.

Essentially in Ground Attack it's rather limited in the then funded and intended clearance of armaments.
It would require firstly a wider range of stores cleared and then ideally (from a RAAF perspective) the RAF to fund a more general purpose version.
For example pylons cleared for 200gal drop tanks should be good for 1,600lb stores.

Right near the last few pages (quite a bit is repeat copies) lurks a Training radius on all kerosene fuel of 650nm without drop tanks and statement drop tanks could extend by 100nm to 200nm the RoA.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if we'll ever get to see photographs of the prototypes under construction before they were ignominiously junked?

With Gloster’s GA6 Thin Wing Javelin, a photo report was made of all the flight hardware and jigs in order to support Gloster’s contract closure cost claim. I have a copy (original with highly appropriate custodian) and have published a few photos on this site. This was likely to have been the standard procedure at the time, hence there would have been a report with a couple of hundred photos of the SR177. I wonder if any copies survived?

The similar TWJ came from a former project engineer who just felt it was right that this piece of history shouldn’t have been lost, so the SR177 equivalent just might be out there.
 
I've been going through the notes of an engineer working on the SR.177. His drawings are... terrible. The maths, definitely back of an envelope at times.
The engineers make the rough drawings. The draughtsmen turn them into clean blueprints. Or at least I think that's how it's supposed to work.

My vision of Heaven is one where, having read a book, I can then go back and re-read it and have all the primary sources the author used at my fingertips. Including the people who wrote the primary sources. "Excuse me, Mr Petter, may I have a moment of your time please?"

I'm with K2 and Maude - I want to see this miracle of engineering and mathematics!
 
I'm been gathering information on the topic slowly since 2015, but not writing anything yet.

So still in the research phase which no doubt means that when your book is published it will be as detailed as the one on the Hawker P.1121, speaking of that book is there going to be a second print run in the near future? I'd love to be able to buy a copy.
 
So still in the research phase which no doubt means that when your book is published it will be as detailed as the one on the Hawker P.1121, speaking of that book is there going to be a second print run in the near future? I'd love to be able to buy a copy.
It's being looked into.
 
I'd love to build a 1/48th or 1/32 scale-motor of an SR.177, are there any kites models available?
The only kits I'm aware of are the Freightdog (modern resin, high quality) and Maintrack (old vacform, challenging to build and more basic) kits in 1/72.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom