nukes – Page 5 – Aerospace Projects Review Blog

Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird – Origins & Evolution

bomber, fighter, hi-rez, hypersonic, Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird Origins and Evolution, nukes, Recon, research, rockets, spacecraft, spaceplane, stealth 6 Responses »

May 202021

Mortons has announced my “bookazine” Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird – Origins & Evolution, now available for pre-order. This is my first published book. Woo! It covers the development of the SR-71 from well before the program started , including the “Suntan” concepts and several Convair high speed reconnaissance platforms, up through the development of the “Archangel” series that led to the CIA’s A-12, through the Mach 3 interceptor designs and the SR-71 itself. From there it also includes a number of proposed derivatives and unbuilt concepts… an A-12 used to launch satellites, the SR-71 as a carrier for a manned hypersonic scramjet vehicle, the use of the “SR-71C” as a flying wind tunnel, etc.

It is available directly through the publisher for £8.99 (Approx $12.41 or €10.34). It is also available through Amazon for pre-order for $12.99. Direct from the publisher should be available sooner; from Amazon, lower mailing cost if you’re in the US.

Here are some shots of a few pages to give you an idea of what’s in it. I created all the diagrams within, based on official sources and as accurate as I could make them. There are many, MANY diagrams here describing designs mundane and downright wacky, from tiny unmanned drones to truly gigantic hydrogen-fueled monsters.

Tell your friends!

A little Preview of “B-47/B-52”

B-47 and B-52 Origins and Evolution, bomber, Dyna Soar, jetliner, launch vehicles, nukes, Recon, research, rockets, spacecraft, spaceplane, transports, VTOL No Responses »

Apr 302021

Here is an incomplete look at the diagrams created for my first book, “Boeing B-47 Stratojet and B-52 Stratofortress; Origins & Evolution.” It can be pre-ordered either directly from the publisher (with publication expected in late September) or through Amazon (looks like they’ll have it two months later). It is also expected to be on certain store shelves… more on that when it’s confirmed.

A few of these diagrams will be compressed to several-per-page; a few of them here are already shown in multiple optional layouts. But there are also a dozen-ish diagrams *not* shown because they are incomplete as yet. This gives an indication of the size and scope of the project…

Trident vs Trident

nukes, rockets, US Launcher Projects No Responses »

Apr 042021

The Trident I and Trident II were fundamentally different missiles, despite the name.

Somewhere around here I have a technical paper on turning the Trident II into a satellite launcher. Been meaning to work that into an issue of US Launch Vehicle Projects one of these years.

CL-1201: it happened again

nukes, transports, US Transport Projects, VTOL No Responses »

Mar 172021

Somehow or other, yet another YouTube video has been produced on the giant nuclear powered Lockheed CL-1201. Seems strange that after all this time this rather obscure design is suddenly getting traction… it’s almost as if YouTubers watch and copy each other. Wheird.

Anyway, *imagine* my surprise to find that the video has one of my copyrighted diagrams in it, without attribution, lightly modified and dumbified. Huh.

Video diagram:

My diagram, taken from Aerospace Projects Review issue V1N3 and US Transport Projects #4:

Yay, I guess? Would be nice if people made some effort to acknowledge where their stuff comes from.

MC-747

bomber, jetliner, nukes, rockets, transports No Responses »

Mar 072021

A video (made with a few contributions from yours truly, and, yes, attributed as such within the video) describing the 1970s Boeing design for an ICBM-carrying airliner, the MC-747. This is described and illustrated in US Bomber Projects issue 21, AVAILABLE HERE.

An interesting idea to be sure, but an unsafe one. Were one of these aircraft to go down for whatever reason, the results would be No Damned Good. Almost certainly the warheads would not go nuclear, but it’s always possible that the combo of the crash, the burning jet fuel and the solid rocket propellant merrily burning away might cause the chemical explosives in the warheads to go off, potentially scattering plutonium all over hither and yon. Worse still would be if the plutonium got sprinkled with the solid propellant and the plutonium combusted, scattering not just chunks and bits of plutonium, which would be bad enough, but clouds of plutonium oxide or plutonium chloride.

Perhaps more dangerous would be the Soviet reaction. They’d be in a constant state of freaking out every time one of these took to the sky, and they probably would have difficulty telling an MC-747 from an E-4 or a civilian 747. And, of course, they’d have to have their own. the AN-124 would be the logical choice for an ICBM carrier, and chances are good they’d do as good of a job with it as they did with Chernobyl, the Kursk or the Polyus.

XB-58 Pods

bomber, nukes, Recon No Responses »

Mar 062021

From well before the B-58 program began, the Convair designers intended for their four-engined supersonic bomber to have a relatively gigantic pod underneath containing fuel and a nuke. The illustration below shows an early B-58 concept with the outboard engine nacelles located above the wing, together with a collection of potential bomb/fuel pods. “Freefall” contains an H-bomb; “Ferret” is electronic intelligence gathering; photo recon is obvious; and PPB is… hmmm. Note that none of these seem to have rockets in the tail, the ferret and photo recon pods doubtless were intended to return with the aircraft rather than be dropped.

Boost-phase interceptor

nukes, rockets, spacecraft No Responses »

Mar 052021

An Aerojet concept for a boost-phase ICBM interceptor.

This would be a space-based anti-missile system composed of two high thrust solid rocket motors and a kill vehicle composed of a substantial set of optics, some impressive late 1980’s computers and most likely a hydrazine monoprop divert system. The missile would be meant to physically impact an ICBM while still being lofted by the first stage; this is an bigger, slower and brighter target than the later, faster, smaller stages and warheads, but you have to be *fast* to reach out and tag a missile in the first moments of flight.

Fleet Ballistic Missiles

launch vehicles, nukes, rockets No Responses »

Mar 012021

From Polaris through Poseidon to Trident D-5:

Every one of those was proposed for alternate roles, from truck-towed and truck-launched land based strike missiles to air-launched and ground-launched satellite boosting systems. And they very likely *could* have done that. But they are just not really well suited for any role but sea launched ballistic missile due to the somewhat tricky propellants they use… high energy propellants so they can function adequately while still being able to fit in a small submarine. But for above-ground systems, they’d be somewhat dubious. The environment within a submarine is pretty consistent. For a missile stored in a warehouse and then hauled aloft by an airplane? The thermal and vibration environments will be highly variable.

Nuclear Princess Model

nukes, research No Responses »

Feb 192021

Recently for sale on ebay was a display model of the Saro “Princess” turboprop flying boat, as Convair planned to modify it into a nuclear-powered research prototype. This late 50’s design was ballsy if nothing else: a nuclear reactor would be installed within the fuselage, providing superheated air from the reactor to the inboard above-wing modified turboprops. Unlike the NB-36H, this aircraft would have been actually powered by the reactor.

A description of the concept was written up HERE. A set of detailed diagrams are available as Air Drawing 8.

CL-1201

jetliner, nukes, transports, US Transport Projects, VTOL No Responses »

Jan 202021

As is known far and wide, I’m not well known. What little fame I have is largely bound up is the aerospace history research and illustration I’ve done; I’m *hoping* that when the two books I’m working on now get published things will change a bit (well, I hope my *work* gains a bit of fame; I’ve little use for *me* becoming famous). Still: while I toil in obscurity, I find that the products of my labor do have a tendency to pop up here and there. Usually when the diagrams I’ve created are used by someone else there’s some sort of attribution… but not always. There’s little to nothing that can be done about that, of course. Just sorta grit my teeth and move on.

So I watched this video, gritted my teeth and will, I suppose, move on. Note that it uses diagrams I created for Aerospace Projects Review issue V1N3 and US Transport Projects #04. What I suppose was funny was that when I started watching the video I largely *expected* to see my diagrams to show up in it… and, yup, there they are. As of this writing, the video has had about half a million views, not a one of which read where the diagrams came from.

UPDATE: After comms with the video maker: it seems he received the diagrams from someone else claiming them as their own. There have been revisions to the description including proper attribution. If this all pans out, there may be collaborations in the future.

Older Entries Newer Entries