Talos, the SPG-56 and the SPG-61

isayyo2

Lurker alert
Joined
Nov 24, 2011
Messages
550
Reaction score
747
Looking at Friedman, he repeats the statement that the Mk 13 could not contain the "slightly larger" Typhon MR (p167). But I believe that is a mistake -- Typhon MR is dimensionally the same as Tartar (and possibly even a few inches shorter than Tartar TRIP).
Is he saying "could not contain" due to size restrictions or to a different missile shape needing different handling gear, or does he really mean "incompatible due to inability to access for nuclear warhead loading"?
I believe the latter since the Mk13 did not have the necessary security features, hence a “Mk14” for Super Tartar/Typhon MR.
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,979
Reaction score
2,567
Looking at Friedman, he repeats the statement that the Mk 13 could not contain the "slightly larger" Typhon MR (p167). But I believe that is a mistake -- Typhon MR is dimensionally the same as Tartar (and possibly even a few inches shorter than Tartar TRIP).
Is he saying "could not contain" due to size restrictions or to a different missile shape needing different handling gear, or does he really mean "incompatible due to inability to access for nuclear warhead loading"?

The words "slightly larger" are directly from Friedman (hence the quotation marks). So at that point in time I think he believed Typhon MR was physically larger than Tartar. But that turns out to be incorrect.
 

Petrus

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
647
Reaction score
404
The MIM-8A Talos Land System missile version is an interesting study in the internal politics of the US military. The USAF originally started the project to develop a land based Talos system with RCA being the contractor. The RCA system used two monopulse C band radars for target illumination and four additional C-band radars for missile guidance. A twin arm launcher based on the US Navy's version was adopted. The system could track and control four missiles and targets at a time.
RCA then built a prototype launch facility at White Sands NM.

View attachment 658624

The target illuminator radars can be seen on the ends of the control building, while the two guidance radars are in the center. The circular pit is the launching position while the odd shaped building is the magazine and assembly room for the missiles. The magazine held just six missiles. The whole project took just 18 months to get to this point primarily because Talos was already tested and in service.

Then came a fight with the Army who was developing Nike Hercules. They didn't want the Air Force to be in the SAM business. Towards the end of 1956 Congress decided that the Army would control SAM programs with a range of less than 100 miles.

So, the Talos Land System was handed over to them. The Talos system had already entered testing. Nike Hercules was still on the drawing board. Regardless of the success of testing on the Talos system, the US Army adopted a 'not invented here' attitude towards the project and dropped most aspects of it in favor of Nike Hercules. The illumination radars remained in service as the FPS-16 for example.

Compared to Nike Hercules, the Talos system could handle 4 targets per launcher and the proposed full site would have two launchers while a Nike Hercules battery with four launchers could handle just one target at a time. The Talos system could also handle low altitude targets better using a trainable and horizonal launch system versus the Nike Hercules vertical launch. Hercules on the other hand had slightly more capacity for very high altitude targets and low end ballistic missiles by virtue of being rocket propelled versus a ramjet.

In the end, land based Talos was a victim of interservice rivalries.
As for the Land Based Talos here is a link to my post in another thread https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/th...s-possible-icbm-interceptor.13362/post-299989, which you'll hopefully find interesting.

Piotr
 

isayyo2

Lurker alert
Joined
Nov 24, 2011
Messages
550
Reaction score
747
Since the USN had a dedicated ARM variant of the Talos (RIM-8H) which was used a few times to great effect in the Vietnam war it would've interesting if an airborne version, call it the AGM-8H, was developed and launched from the B-52 mounted on modified Hound Dog pylons.
Now that's sky-high thinking! I wonder if an EA-3 could be modified to carry one? Replace the bomb bay with sensors and fuel, build in an AGM-8 sized recess where bay doors once were and then go to town over Hanoi?
 
Last edited:

NMaude

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
275
Reaction score
230
Since the USN had a dedicated ARM variant of the Talos (RIM-8H) which was used a few times to great effect in the Vietnam war it would've interesting if an airborne version, call it the AGM-8H, was developed and launched from the B-52 mounted on modified Hound Dog pylons.
Now that's sky-high thinking! I wonder if an EA-3 could be modified to carry one? Replace the bomb bay with sensors and fuel, build in an AGM-8 sized recess where bay doors once were and then go to town over Hanoi?
I'm not sure that would be possible given just how big a Talos was, an EA-3B was likely too small to carry one.
 

T. A. Gardner

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Feb 18, 2021
Messages
282
Reaction score
523
Since the USN had a dedicated ARM variant of the Talos (RIM-8H) which was used a few times to great effect in the Vietnam war it would've interesting if an airborne version, call it the AGM-8H, was developed and launched from the B-52 mounted on modified Hound Dog pylons.
Now that's sky-high thinking! I wonder if an EA-3 could be modified to carry one? Replace the bomb bay with sensors and fuel, build in an AGM-8 sized recess where bay doors once were and then go to town over Hanoi?
I would think it would be a B-66 but EA-3 too likely could carry two Talos if fitted with pylons to do so. Both planes have a 15,000 lbs. payload and a Talos weights 7,800 lbs. with the booster. Assuming either no need for the booster or a smaller one due to the plane's own speed, carrying two should be possible, at least theoretically.
 

NMaude

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Mar 12, 2021
Messages
275
Reaction score
230
Assuming either no need for the booster or a smaller one due to the plane's own speed
They still would need a booster as an EA-3B would be flying at high subsonic speeds when launching it, IIRC the Talos needs to reach ~M1.5 for the ramjet to successfully start.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
1,864
Reaction score
1,555
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
Now that's sky-high thinking! I wonder if an EA-3 could be modified to carry one? Replace the bomb bay with sensors and fuel, build in an AGM-8 sized recess where bay doors once were and then go to town over Hanoi?
It would require some sort of mid-course guidance installed on missile. Or plane equipped with guiding radar, so missile could be guided near target.
 

Dilandu

I'm dissatisfied, which means, I exist.
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
1,864
Reaction score
1,555
Website
fonzeppelin.livejournal.com
I would think it would be a B-66 but EA-3 too likely could carry two Talos if fitted with pylons to do so. Both planes have a 15,000 lbs. payload and a Talos weights 7,800 lbs. with the booster. Assuming either no need for the booster or a smaller one due to the plane's own speed, carrying two should be possible, at least theoretically.
Must admit that I speculated about modernized "Talos" as standoff anti-ship missile for A-3) It would require adaptation of electronic to work with plane radar, of course, but I think that against big reflective naval targets we could use the same radar to midcourse guidance (beam-riding) and terminal guidance (switch on semi-active)
 
Top