Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

[Nyrath]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

I still recall' date=' with some fondness, the model kit I built back when: atomic powered bomber....with a "parasite" fighter that docked to the bombers tail !!![/quote']

Somebody is creating a (very expensive) replica of that kit

http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/ConvairXAB-1CatalogPage.htm

[Nyrath]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Oh' date=' to have a "shaped charge-able" nuclear device...... [/quote']

You mean like this?

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3x.html#shapedcharge

[Nyrath]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

The fabled "collapsing round" of song and story ?

 

I well recall that gadget rearing it's metaphorical head in a gaming scenario (or two) back in the 1980's.

Yeah, from Striker, the army miniatures game for Traveller. Hollow Californium bullets. Worthless unless you have a Traveller techno-magic "nuclear damper".

[lemming]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Well, there was Project Plowshare

[Cancer]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Well' date=' there was Project Plowshare

 

I've linked this before, but some of the Plowshare test videos have been declassified and are available here.

 

The Sedan test, and the crater it left behind, remains a scientifically important experiment. It is the anchor point for the relationship between deposited energy and crater size for impact craters.

[Nyrath]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Well' date=' there was Project Plowshare

Yeah, let's dig a second Panama canal in ten seconds flat.

[clsage]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Yeah' date=' from Striker, the army miniatures game for Traveller. Hollow Californium bullets. Worthless unless you have a Traveller techno-magic "nuclear damper".[/quote']

 

Yep...And it also showed up in at least one supplement for "Top Secret", without a damper ( :eek: )....As I recall it was a catalog of plot hooks.....

 

-Carl

[clsage]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Somebody is creating a (very expensive) replica of that kit

http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/ConvairXAB-1CatalogPage.htm

 

Oh my...yep...that sure looks like the suspect in question.... :D

[clsage]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

You mean like this?

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3x.html#shapedcharge

 

:hail:

[Kristopher]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

You mean like this?

http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3x.html#shapedcharge

 

That is too damn cool, as an idea seed for big weapons in my science fiction game. An up-teched version of that would be devestating.

[Nyrath]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Details of the nuclear shaped charge are sketchy. But you might try going to Google and doing a web search for "Casaba Howitzer"

Blasted thing is a directed energy weapon that we could build today.

[IndianaJoe3]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

I still recall' date=' with some fondness, the model kit I built back when: atomic powered bomber....with a "parasite" fighter that docked to the bombers tail !!![/quote']

 

That sounds like the proposed combination of the B-36 and F-85.

[Ian Mackinder]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

I've seen the kit, long ago. Totally different aircraft - the "atomic/mother plane" looks nothing like a B-36 - more like some kind of 1960s-era NASA wet dream, and the "parasite plane" looks vaguely like a F-104.

[Nyrath]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

You mean this one?

http://www.ninfinger.org/models/boxtops/hawk514.jpg

http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/XAB-1%20BETA-1%20PAGE.htm

[Ian Mackinder]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

You mean this one?

http://www.ninfinger.org/models/boxtops/hawk514.jpg

http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/XAB-1%20BETA-1%20PAGE.htm

 

Ayup, that's the one. Looks very cool, actually.

 

Maybe it got built in the AH where they DIDN'T build nuclear super-carriers or SSBNs - and in that timeline, our equivalents are now looking at pics and model kits of those things-that-never-were.

[Nyrath]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

The only thing about that design that I am leery of is that the poor parasite planes have to fly through the radioactive exhaust of the mother ship while docking.

[Lawnmower Boy]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

The only thing about that design that I am leery of is that the poor parasite planes have to fly through the radioactive exhaust of the mother ship while docking.

 

It's good for you! Builds character --puts hair on your chest.

You're not some kind of chest hair-hating hippie, are you?

[Kristopher]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Umm' date=' not to me. Can you explain, please? Or is it because such materials don't exist?[/quote']

 

A) With a half-life of less than a week, it's probably very radioactive.

 

In a couple of weeks, your atomic bullet is a dud, and might as well be made of lead in terms of explosive power.

[DusterBoy]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

That bomber looks teh awesome, and so does the model kit. I used to build a lot of model aircraft when I was a kid (and my fingers were more nimble). I may have to get that just for nostalgia's sake.

 

And thanks for the info, Kris.

[Yansuf]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

A) With a half-life of less than a week, it's probably very radioactive.

 

In a couple of weeks, your atomic bullet is a dud, and might as well be made of lead in terms of explosive power.

 

Actually, it will be less than a week before the round won't give a significant explosive yield.

[Kristopher]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Actually' date=' it will be less than a week before the round won't give a significant explosive yield.[/quote']

 

I wasn't sure where the cutoff would be. Still, the basic point stands -- it's not a round that keeps well, yes?

[John-Walton]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

What was their alternative? Those bombers if it came down to a shooting war' date=' HAD to be stopped. Allowing even one to get through would be unthinkable. And the technology for making reliably targetable air to air missiles simply was not there yet. "That's" what they were thinking.[/quote']

 

excellent rebuttal. makes me wish for the good old days.

 

anyone got the old 4th edition nuke stats handy ?

[gewing]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

You have to consider what they figured on facing.

 

The standard Russian bomber in 1956 was slow, unmanouverable, but with a very good range - as it was a prop job. The ONLY way the Soviets were going to get some to the US via the polar route was by sending HORDES of the things. So, this was a plan for reducing the hordes.

 

Oh and btw, the Davy Crockett was a very effective weapon, actually. It was diallable as to output, and the idea that it's Alpha Kill Zone exceeded it's range is an urban myth.

 

IIRC the range with the 120mm recoilless was short enought that there were more concerns. The 155mm let it reach out a bit further.

 

Effectively a neutron bomb. The lethal radius of the radiation was apparently significantly larger than the radius of the fireball and blast front. As long as the launching troops had a good trench to duck down in, they would have had a "reasonable" survival rate. :0

 

Heck, even the A-1 skyraider had a nuclear strike role. They were slated to loft bomb or pitch bomb a nuke at the Soviet coastal bases. The odds they would manage to turn around and get out fast enough to survive were small enough that iirc the put a rocket motor on the bomb to give them more range for their airburst...

[gewing]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

Details of the nuclear shaped charge are sketchy. But you might try going to Google and doing a web search for "Casaba Howitzer"

Blasted thing is a directed energy weapon that we could build today.

 

sounds like we could have built it in 1970...

 

 

And I thougth SLAM was the scariest of the designs...

 

 

Though cluster munitions using the warheads from Genie or Davy Crockett...

[Nyrath]

Re: Sky Scorcher 1 megaton air-to-air missile (1956)

 

sounds like we could have built it in 1970...

 

And I thougth SLAM was the scariest of the designs...

Well, at least with Casaba howitzer, you were not troubled with the problem of disposing of the blasted thing. With SLAM (aka Project Pluto), the cruise missile would come home after completing its mission, hotter than a nuclear reactor core element. I think they planned to ditch it into the Marianas Trench or something like that. Which would make Greenpeace and Prince Namor very angry.

 

IIRC the Casaba howitzer concept was intended to make an Orion-drive spacecraft into a species of space-going battleship. According to George Dyson's book PROJECT ORION, President Kennedy was horrified at this and canceled the space battleship. The Casaba howitzer was further developed for the Strategic Defense Initiative ("Star Wars missile defence"), where it became even more classified.

 

Yes, we could have had this in 1970.