PDA

View Full Version : Vought SLAM (Supersonic Low-Altitude Missile)



Lt-Col A. Tack
09-04-2008, 03:25 PM
Vought SLAM (Pluto)

http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/9891/fig0vj5.jpg

Overview

Studies of the feasibility of using nuclear power for propulsion officially began in New York City in May 1946 but were moved to Oak Ridge, Tennessee, in September of that year to be at the source of nuclear technology. The NEPA (Nuclear Energy for Propulsion of Aircraft) Project made numerous studies of the direct air cycle in which air is heated by conduction as it passes through a nuclear reactor.

The design of ceramic reactors led to the possibility of a nuclear ramjet with unlimited range. In November of 1955 the U.S. Office of Strategic Development asked the Atomic Energy Commission to determine the feasibility of this concept. By October 1956 the world situation was such that the U.S. Air Force issued a System Requirement (SR #149) for a nuclear-powered winged missile. Further internal Air Force studies and reactor development at General Electric’s Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion Project and later at the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory of the University of California indicated overall feasibility of the nuclear reactor.

The Cold War situation at the time dictated the need for a strategic missile with positive deterrence or retaliation capability. Chance Vought also recognized the need and in 1957 formed a study group under Dr. Walt Hesse to do unfunded studies. These and studies at other aircraft companies resulted in the United States Air Force issuing Requests for Proposal which were sent out to the aircraft industry.

In August 1958, Chance Vought Aircraft, North American Aviation, and Convair were selected to conduct funded studies of a low-altitude nuclear-powered strategic missile for a mission no chemical-powered vehicle could perform.

In early 1961 another competition was held among the three aircraft companies for a contract to study and demonstrate the feasibility of the missile airframe and subsystems. This competition was won by Chance Vought Aircraft and a contract was awarded in April 1961, titled “Aerothermo-dynamics for Pluto”. Pluto was the code name of the ceramic reactor development project then being done at Lawrence Radiation Laboratory.

Studies, design and tests of a nuclear- powered strategic missile weapon system were conducted at Chance Vought Aircraft during the period from early 1956 to mid1964. During this period all the technical unknowns were evaluated and shown to be solvable. A conceptual design of a missile was completed and a test nuclear reactor for propulsion was operated at full power.


Airframe

http://img359.imageshack.us/img359/1484/fig3akw8.jpg

No airframe had been designed to operate in the environment of Mach 3 at sea level where skin temperatures reach 1,000 Fahrenheit and the sound pressure level is on the order of 162 db. Aerodynamics in this flight regime was little explored. Almost 1600 hours of wind tunnel testing in all the national laboratories resulted in a canard configuration design that could operate in the planned flight profile.

The classical spike inlet was replaced with a scoop-type inlet invented in the program, which gave pitch/yaw performance over a wider range and a pressure recovery of 86% that was much higher than the initial program objective. An extensive materials investigative program resulted in the selection and fabrication of a section of fuselage using Rene 41 stainless steel with a skin thickness of 1/10 to ¼ inch.

This was strength- tested in a furnace to simulate aerodynamic heating. Forward sections of the missile were to be gold plated to dissipate heat by radiation. A 1/3-scale model of the missile nose, inlet and duct was constructed and wind tunnel tested.

A preliminary inboard design of the complete weapon system missile was made to show location of all equipment and hardware, including the hydrogen weapons. A detailed and final design would have been required.


Electronics

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/2914/db0429046bj8.jpg
SLAM 1/10 Scale Model

Because the SLAM reactor would operate at high radiation levels without shielding, finding suitable electronics that could operate even for the few hours lifetime required was a daunting task. Careful selection and substitution of insulation materials, potting compounds, and semiconductors in a full complement of missile electronics such as guidance and control, telemetry and instrumentation was made with industry assistance.

The largest radiation effects test ever conducted took place in 1964 in the Air Force’s NARF facility at General Dynamics under SLAM Program sponsorship. It was demonstrated that suitable system electronics were or could be made available for the SLAM mission.


Guidance

To deliver multiple warheads with precision over long ranges required a dual guidance system. Inertial systems were available but were not capable of surviving in the harsh radiation environment. The impetus of the program resulted in the development of gas dynamic bearings for gyroscopes, and radiation-resistant, or “hardened” components which were evaluated in the Air Force NARF facility. These tests showed that inertial guidance systems could be made which would satisfy the mission requirements if midcourse and terminal corrections could be made. The Vought- funded studies associated with SLAM developed a precise system for such an application.

This system was patented under the name of FINGERPRINT. The name was changed to TERCOM when the rights were assigned to the U.S.A.F. and is still known today by that name when used in the cruise missile. The system employs terrain contour information along the flight path stored in a digital matrix. A matrix of terrain elevations was concluded to be as distinctive as the human fingerprint. Elevations of all land areas of the earth were available from contour maps. Downward- looking radar on the missile then compares the real elevations with the stored data and the missile position is determined and corrections made to direct it toward the target.

Several TERCOM fixes could be made as SLAM proceeded to multiple targets. Extensive flight testing over all types of terrain, with and without snow cover, verified that accurate missile locations could be obtained. All the required hardware was verified in the NARF facility as being suitable for operation in a radiation environment.


Radiation

The source of energy for SLAM propulsion was to be a nuclear fission reactor operating at a power level of 600 Megawatts. The reactor was not to have radiation shielding for the fission products of neutrons and gamma rays. As a result, the neutron flux was calculated to vary from 9 x 1017 N/CM2 in the aft section to 7 x 1014 N/CM2 in the nose. Gamma ray energy was expected to be 4 x 1011 MEV in the aft section and 1.2 x 108MEV in the electronics compartment.

This required careful selection of materials which could survive not only the high temperatures but also the high radiation levels. The study program investigated all missile subsystems. Some very sensitive ones required a feasible amount of local shielding. The result of the investigations led to the conclusion that missile subsystems were available or could be made available for the SLAM application.

Flight testing of the missile was planned to be conducted over the northwest Pacific ocean with termination in deep ocean waters in the neighborhood where atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons had taken place.


Reactor

The reactor development work for nuclear propulsion systems was started by the NEPA Project and specific development for nuclear ramjet application at the Aircraft Nuclear Propulsion Department of the General Electric Company. As the ramjet program gained in importance, it was moved to the Lawrence Radiation Laboratory (LRL) of the University of California in January 1957. LRL’s working with Chance Vought for missile propulsion requirements resulted in the following nuclear reactor characteristics for the SLAM weapon system:

Diameter----------------------57.25 in.
Fissionable Core-------------47.24 in.
Length-------------------------64.24 in.
Core Length------------------50.70 in.
Critical Mass of Uranium--59.90 kg.
Avg. Power Density---------10 MW/cubic foot
Total Power-------------------600 MW
Avg. Element Temperature- 2,330 deg. F


The fuel elements for the test reactors were made of the high-temperature ceramic beryllium oxide (BO). This was mixed with enriched uranium di-oxide (UO2) in a homogeneous mixture with a small amount of zirconium di-oxide (ZrO2) for stabilization. This mixture in a plastic mass was extruded by the Coors Porcelain Company under high pressure and then sintered to near theoretical minimum density.

Each fuel element was a hollow hexagonal tube approximately 4 inches long, 0.3 inches across flats, and had an inside diameter of 0.227 inches. These were stacked end to end to provide the 50.7 inch length of heated air passage. There were 27,000 of these heated airflow channels and 465,000 individual fuel elements. The design with these small unattached pieces was such that the problems of thermal stress in ceramics was minimized.

Two reactor tests were conducted to verify feasibility. Tory II-A was a scaled-down test which was conducted in mid-1961 and operated at design conditions on October 5, 1961. Tory II-C was a full-scale reactor test for a period of 292 seconds which was the limit of the air supply from the storage facility. That facility stored 1.2 million pounds of air which had to be preheated to 943 degrees Fahrenheit and supplied at a pressure of 316 psi to simulate ramjet inlet diffuser conditions. Tests were conducted at Jackass Flats in The Nevada Test Station by Lawrence Radiation Laboratory. These tests demonstrated the feasibility of the nuclear power-plant for the SLAM weapon system.

http://img398.imageshack.us/img398/3056/fig3bwl1.jpg
The centerpiece of the Pluto effort, the Tory reactor was designed to be durable but compact enough to fly.

http://img181.imageshack.us/img181/6271/fig1sn4.jpg
The 25 miles of oil well casing needed to store air for ramject simulations dominated Pluto's test site at Jackass Flats.

http://img375.imageshack.us/img375/1931/fig2bu8.jpg
Mounted on a railroad car, Tory-IIC is readied for its highly successful May 1964 test.


http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/8026/a0429047oxn7.jpg


Muscle in Mothballs

All the major areas had been investigated by mid-1964 and the feasibility of nuclear flight was firmly established, laying a foundation for proceeding with a detailed design and flight test. But the world was beginning to change with the Cuban missile crisis in the past, the development of long-range ballistic missiles, and the advent of space exploration. The concept of releasing radioactive fission products in the atmosphere in any locale was being rejected as more was learned of the effects of their release.

The program was terminated in July 1964 by the Department of Defense and the State Department as “being too provocative”. It was believed by many that if the U.S. deployed a missile of such awesome power against which there was no known defense, then the Soviets would be compelled to do so. At the end of the project, Chance Vought had 177 engineers and scientists involved in the program full time. It was called “a model technology program” by the Department of Defense. Much of the technology, especially that of the guidance system, TERCOM, is utilized in the cruise missile that is part of today’s arsenal of U.S. weapons.

Link (http://www.voughtaircraft.com/heritage/products/html/slam.html)

Also:
The Flying Crowbar (http://www.merkle.com/pluto/pluto.html)
SLAM (Pluto) (http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app4/slam.html)

domokun
09-04-2008, 03:41 PM
I've read that article before, impressive missile. They should have built that. That thing is made of win.

Lt-Col A. Tack
09-04-2008, 03:48 PM
I've read that article before, impressive missile. They should have built that. That thing is made of win.

Interesting idea, I'll grant you but ICBMs were faster (more survivable)

Would be the basis for a tremendously powerful cruise missile though! :)
(Although I would recommend a new powerplant, obviously.)

GazB
09-05-2008, 03:04 AM
I've read that article before, impressive missile. They should have built that. That thing is made of win.

A mach 3 low level missile would be incredibly difficult to intercept. A missile like AMRAAM might hit targets at 50km in a head on engagement, but at low level its max range would be about 20km. Sidewinder at higher altitudes and speeds can hit targets at 20-25km, but at low level its range is about 2-4km. Even the fastest flying interceptors like the Mig-31 and Mig-25 are just supersonic at sea level, so this thing flys 3 times faster.

A large Mach 3 cruise missiles belching radioactive waste would be flying fast enough to knock down some buildings and trees, and the supersonic shockwave at that altitude would smash windows and kill unprotected humans.

Of course the second biggest danger is that it could fly around for years without running out of fuel, spreading nuclear waste and destruction everywhere.

And the biggest danger is if the Soviets had made something similar...

domokun
09-05-2008, 03:11 AM
I was trying be sarcastic. That nuclear propulsion was never tested in athmospere for very good reason. It's endurance is very impressive still.

GazB
09-05-2008, 03:41 AM
I was trying be sarcastic. That nuclear propulsion was never tested in athmospere for very good reason. It's endurance is very impressive still.

We obviously need a sarcasm smiley...

domokun
09-05-2008, 03:42 AM
We obviously need a sarcasm smiley...

Very true, indeed.:)

Euroamerican
09-05-2008, 12:34 PM
That's a doomsday weapon.... says cap'n obvious.

Winger
09-05-2008, 01:07 PM
The technology there could be the basis of the future of Earth to space flight and space to Moon flight I think.

Lt-Col A. Tack
09-05-2008, 01:11 PM
I wonder why they decided to make a bomber, instead of just a bomb.
Why didn't they consider just putting a big thermonuclear warhead in the thing.

The airframe is interesting, though.

nagant_m44
09-05-2008, 01:38 PM
I wonder why they decided to make a bomber, instead of just a bomb.
Why didn't they consider just putting a big thermonuclear warhead in the thing.

The airframe is interesting, though.

probably because they wanted to save money.

Lt-Col A. Tack
09-05-2008, 01:56 PM
probably because they wanted to save money.

I would think a single large warhead that you could deliver to one point and detonate would be a more straightforward task that having this unpiloted bomber flying around, discharging bombs along a route.

nagant_m44
09-05-2008, 04:51 PM
I would think a single large warhead that you could deliver to one point and detonate would be a more straightforward task that having this unpiloted bomber flying around, discharging bombs along a route.

yea, but having a separate missile for each warhead would cost much more than a single missile with many warheads.

Laworkerbee
09-05-2008, 06:46 PM
probably because they wanted to save money.

The USAF doesn't know a damned thing about saving money nor care as far as I'm concerned.

GazB
09-07-2008, 01:02 AM
The technology there could be the basis of the future of Earth to space flight and space to Moon flight I think.

It is a jet. It uses a nuclear reactor to superheat the air, like a jet engine heats the air by burning fuel and heating the air. It wouldn't work in space as there is no air to heat in a vacuum.


I wonder why they decided to make a bomber, instead of just a bomb.
Why didn't they consider just putting a big thermonuclear warhead in the thing.

It had to be fairly large but with a nuclear reactor as an engine it was rather expensive. If I remember correctly they ended up wanting to put about 26 nuclear warheads in each weapon and this thing was supposed to fly around the Soviet Union dropping bombs every once in a while over a period of months while irradiating and destroying things with its speed and dirty exhaust. Each missile probably would have cost about the same as building an aircraft carrier at the time.


I would think a single large warhead that you could deliver to one point and detonate would be a more straightforward task that having this unpiloted bomber flying around, discharging bombs along a route.

A modern nuclear reactor is not cheap. A nuclear reactor back then wouldn't have been cheap either. Even just flying around it is destroying things and killing people with the shockwave and radiation. Taking the time to make a missile that can fly for months or years, and a guidance system accurate enough to hit point targets, why not put a few dozen warheads on it. It is hardly a first strike weapon as we know it today but would be an excellent deterrent.

bigfootsf
09-08-2008, 05:07 PM
Interesting. I had never heard of this. It was mentioned in Charles Stross' short story "A Colder War" built to defeat...well, not the Soviet Union, exactly. Something far worse. If you're interested, it's online.

Paddy51
09-08-2008, 05:16 PM
As always a good posting Lt-Col A. Tack :)

Most fascinating story. In my opinion this was brave and forward looking science and engineering. These guys really forged ahead into the unknown and we seldomly see this kind of gutsy stuff today.

Some time ago I read about a nuclear engine that sits somewhere in the desert and is visited once a year for inspection. The same people never go on these inspections due to the radiation. After having read the material in this posting I tried to find info about this engine in the desert, wondering if it was a relic from these experiments but couldn't locate any material. :roll:

orionhawk
09-08-2008, 06:51 PM
I want one.

What I really want, though, is to be able to convert the neutron-intensity and gamma-energy numbers to Rem or Rad (dose rates). I understand dose rates.

Just guessing, about 1 or 2 THOUSAND rem/hr near-contact. (100 rem acute will cause radiation sickness. 1000 is usually not survivable.) It wouldn't be near you all that long.

IIRC, JPL or Sandia also tested a nuclear hypergolic rocket, with LH2 or liquid helium as the fuel. It produced some really ridiculous specific impulse, but only while ****ting parts of itself out the nozzle.

Lt-Col A. Tack
09-08-2008, 07:17 PM
As always a good posting Lt-Col A. Tack :)
You're most welcome, sir :)


Most fascinating story. In my opinion this was brave and forward looking science and engineering. These guys really forged ahead into the unknown and we seldomly see this kind of gutsy stuff today.It was well funded and there was a lot of enthusiasm for the project.

From one of the links (http://www.merkle.com/pluto/pluto.html):
"Although Pluto never flew, the exotic materials developed for the nuclear ramjet find application today in ceramic turbines and space-based power reactors."


Some time ago I read about a nuclear engine that sits somewhere in the desert and is visited once a year for inspection. The same people never go on these inspections due to the radiation. After having read the material in this posting I tried to find info about this engine in the desert, wondering if it was a relic from these experiments but couldn't locate any material. :roll:If you come across any more information, please post.


I want one.

What I really want, though, is to be able to convert the neutron-intensity and gamma-energy numbers to Rem or Rad (dose rates). I understand dose rates.

Just guessing, about 1 or 2 THOUSAND rem/hr near-contact. (100 rem acute will cause radiation sickness. 1000 is usually not survivable.) It wouldn't be near you all that long.

IIRC, JPL or Sandia also tested a nuclear hypergolic rocket, with LH2 or liquid helium as the fuel. It produced some really ridiculous thrust impulse, but only while ****ting parts of itself out the nozzle.Interesting, any info would be appreciated.

orionhawk
09-08-2008, 07:23 PM
wiki:

Practical testing
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/Kiwi-A_Prime_Atomic_Reactor.jpg/180px-Kiwi-A_Prime_Atomic_Reactor.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kiwi-A_Prime_Atomic_Reactor.jpg) [/URL]
The KIWI A prime nuclear thermal rocket engine


Although engineering studies of all of these designs were made, only the solid-core engine was ever built. Development of such engines started under the aegis of the Atomic Energy Commission (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Kiwi-A_Prime_Atomic_Reactor.jpg) in 1956 as Project Rover, with work on a suitable reactor starting at LANL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LANL). Two basic designs came from this project, Kiwi and NRX.
Kiwi was the first to be fired, starting in July 1959 with Kiwi 1. The reactor was not intended for flight, hence the naming of the rocket after a flightless bird (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi). This was unlike later tests because the engine design could not really be used, the core was simply a stack of uncoated uranium oxide plates onto which the hydrogen was dumped. Nevertheless it generated 70 MW and produced an exhaust of 2683 K. Two additional tests of the basic concept, A' and A3, added coatings to the plates to test fuel rod concepts.
The Kiwi B series fully developed the fuel system, which consisted of the uranium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium) fuel in the form of tiny uranium dioxide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_dioxide) (UO2) spheres embedded in a low-boron (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boron) graphite (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphite) matrix, and then coated with niobium carbide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niobium_carbide). Nineteen holes ran the length of the bundles, and through these holes the liquid hydrogen flowed for cooling. A final change introduced during the Kiwi program changed the fuel to uranium carbide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_carbide), which was run for the last time in 1964.
Using information developed from the Kiwi series, the Phoebus series developed much larger reactors. The first 1A test in June 1965 ran for over 10 minutes at 1090 MW, with an exhaust temperature of 2370 K. The B run in February 1967 improved this to 1500 MW for 30 minutes. The final 2A test in June 1968 ran for over 12 minutes at 4,000 MW, the most powerful nuclear reactor ever built. For contrast, the largest hydroelectric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroelectric) plant in the world, Itaipu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itaipu), produces 12,600 MW, 25% of all the power used in Brazil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil).
A smaller version of Kiwi, the Peewee was also built. It was fired several times at 500 MW in order to test coatings made of zirconium carbide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zirconium_carbide) (instead of niobium carbide (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niobium_carbide)) but also increased the power density of the system. An unrelated water-cooled system known as NF-1 (for Nuclear Furnace) was used for future materials testing.
While Kiwi was being run, NASA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA) joined the effort with their NERVA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA) program (Nuclear Engine for Rocket Vehicle Applications). Unlike the AEC work, which was intended to study the reactor design itself, NERVA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA) was aiming to produce a real engine that could be deployed on space missions. A 75,000 lbf (334 kN) thrust baseline design was considered for some time as the upper stages for the Saturn V (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturn_V), in place of the J-2s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J-2_(rocket_engine)) that were actually flown. Eugene F. Lally of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory had published proposals of manned Mars missions based on this technology in the early 1960s.
The design that eventually developed, known as NRX for short, started testing in September 1964. The final engine in this series was the EX, which was the first designed to be fired in a downward position (like a "real" rocket engine) and was fired twenty-eight times in March 1968. The series all generated 1100 MW, and many of the tests concluded only when the test-stand ran out of hydrogen fuel. EX produced the baseline 75,000 lbf (334 kN) thrust that NERVA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA) required.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8f/KIWI_TNT_reactor_test.jpg/180px-KIWI_TNT_reactor_test.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:KIWI_TNT_reactor_test.jpg)
A KIWI engine being destructively tested


All of these designs also shared a number of problems that were never completely cured. The engines were also quite easy to break, and on many firings the vibrations inside the reactors cracked the fuel bundles and caused the reactors to break apart. This problem was largely solved by the end of the program, and related work at Argonne National Laboratory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:KIWI_TNT_reactor_test.jpg) looked promising. However, while the graphite construction was indeed able to be heated to high temperatures, it likewise eroded quite heavily due to the hydrogen. The coatings never wholly solved this problem, and significant "losses" of fuel occurred on most firings. This problem did not look like it would be solved any time soon.
The NERVA/Rover (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NERVA) project was eventually cancelled in 1972 with the general wind-down of NASA in the post-Apollo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Apollo) era. Without a manned mission (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manned_mission) to Mars (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars), the need for a nuclear thermal rocket was unclear. To a lesser extent it was becoming clear that there could be intense public outcry against any attempt to use a nuclear engine.
Although the Kiwi/Phoebus/NERVA designs were the only to be tested in any substantial program, a number of other solid-core engines were also studied to some degree. The Small Nuclear Rocket Engine, or SNRE, was designed at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Alamos_National_Laboratory) (LANL) for upper stage use, both on unmanned launchers as well as the Space Shuttle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle). It featured a split-nozzle that could be rotated to the side, allowing it to take up less room in the Shuttle cargo bay. The design provided 73 kN of thrust and operated at a specific impulse of 875 seconds (8.58 kN·s/kg), and it was planned to increase this to 975 with fairly basic upgrades. This allowed it to achieve a mass fraction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_fraction) of about 0.74, comparing with 0.86 for the SSME, one of the best conventional engines.

[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_thermal_rocket