The commands of a number of capitalist states, and especially, pay great attention to the comprehensive preparation of their troops for future aggressive wars. A significant place in such training, as evidenced by numerous joint exercises armed forces, is assigned to the organization and conduct of aviation support ground forces and the Navy, which largely depends on the ability of aviation to overcome strong air defense enemy.
Analyzing experience local wars and taking into account the progressive development of technology and weapons, abroad they came to the conclusion that in future wars, aviation will have to face continuous air defense of enemy territory, reinforced around important objects. Such defense will cover almost all altitudes at which flights of modern aircraft are possible. Under these conditions, tactical fighters need to break through the air defense system on the way to targets, in the area of their location and on the return route.
The foreign press has already described certain methods of overcoming air defense, namely: bypassing tightly covered areas, defensive maneuvering while simultaneously setting up electronic jamming, flying at extremely low altitudes, launching guided missiles outside the affected areas of air defense systems. Each of them has its own advantages and disadvantages, and some can only be used in a certain combat situation.
IN Lately foreign experts increasingly began to believe that combat aircraft must overcome continuous strong enemy air defense at low and extremely low altitudes, at the highest possible, and even supersonic, speeds.
Flights at low altitudes have practically already been mastered. Some aircraft even have special equipment installed that allows them to fly automatically at extremely low altitudes while following the terrain. These in the United States include the F-111 fighter-bomber and the FB-111 medium bomber.
As for flights at supersonic speeds, when they are carried out in the lower dense layers of the atmosphere, a number of problems arise related to the strength of the structure, the perfection of on-board equipment and the psychological stress of the crews. But, given the certain advantages of such flights in overcoming air defense compared to other methods, foreign experts are looking for ways to resolve the difficulties that arise.
First of all, let's note advantages of flying at supersonic speed. Such flights, as emphasized in the foreign press, reduce the enemy’s chances of shooting down the plane with anti-aircraft fire or interceptor fighters.
Probability of an aircraft being destroyed by anti-aircraft fire depends mainly on the characteristics of the latter, as well as on the altitude and speed of the aircraft. In capitalist countries, there are air defense systems, such as and, which are not designed to conduct targeted fire at aircraft flying at supersonic speeds. But there are other air defense systems - , , and SZU, capable of hitting targets following the route, respectively, at speeds of 500, 555, 450 and 475 m/s. However, the reaction time of some of them (from the moment of detecting a flying aircraft to shooting) does not always allow them to shoot down low-flying targets. For latest air defense systems and SZU it is respectively equal to 12, 7, 10 and 4 s. But to this time we should also add the flight time of shells or missiles to the target.
In Fig. 1 shows a graph of the flight time of projectiles of different calibers anti-aircraft systems from the firing range. If we conventionally assume that a 30-mm cannon shell was fired at a target at a distance of 2000 m, then its flight time will be 2.7 s. During this period, for example, an airplane at a speed of 400 m/s (1450 km/h) will cover a distance of about 1080 m. Therefore, it is necessary to accurately calculate the lead. But at the same time, during flight at altitudes up to 70 m, the aircraft can be in the field of view of combat crews of anti-aircraft weapons for 5 - 25 s (most real time abroad they consider 10 s, which is quite possible to achieve with the appropriate choice of flight route taking into account the terrain). This circumstance greatly complicates the use of anti-aircraft weapons against such targets.
Rice. 1. Dependence of flight time of 20 mm caliber projectiles (curve 1). 30 mm (2), 40 mm (3) and 35 mm (4) from the firing range of anti-aircraft weapons
Interception of an aircraft flying at supersonic speed and low altitude, but in the opinion of foreign experts, it is very complicated. These are caused by a decrease in its detection range, a decrease in the probability of it being hit by missiles due to interference created by the background of the earth, and the impossibility of attacking it from the front hemisphere. The crew of an aircraft flying at low altitude can also detect the interceptor earlier and perform a defensive maneuver.
It is believed that after detecting a target, an interceptor aircraft must approach it and reach the missile launch line. However, the attacker will solve this problem only when he is able to quickly develop sufficient speed, depending on his thrust-to-weight ratio. In Fig. Figure 2 shows a graph of the dependence of the probability of intercepting an air target on its speed and the interceptor’s thrust-to-weight ratio, obtained by modeling the process of approach and attack. It was taken into account that the goal should be given course at a certain speed until the projectiles are launched. From the graph it follows: the probability of intercepting a target flying at a speed of M = 1.1 exceeds 0.5 only when the interceptor aircraft’s thrust-to-weight ratio is more than 1.15. However, even in this case, early maneuvering of the target can lead to the attack being disrupted by its interceptor.
Rice. 2. Dependence of the probability of chain interception on its flight speed and the thrust-to-weight ratio of the interceptor aircraft
But significant difficulties when flying at supersonic speeds, and especially when striking ground targets.
Experts abroad believe that it is advisable to carry out such attacks only on particularly important stationary objects that are well defended by anti-aircraft weapons (dams, power plants, factories, airfields and others). Suddenly detected or small moving objects cannot be attacked at such speeds due to lack of time.
The foreign press noted that existing supersonic aircraft with ammunition suspended on them are not suitable for flying to a target at supersonic speeds for the following reasons:
- the combat load located on the external suspension units sharply limits the maximum permissible flight speed of the aircraft, sometimes reducing it by half due to high drag.
- Ammunition safety is not ensured. Almost all currently in use aerial bombs have fuses with trinitrotoluene charges. It is known that trinitrotoluene melts at a temperature of +81°C, but as a precaution (spontaneous explosion is possible), its melting point is considered to be 71-73°C. Experiments showed that cargo suspended on an aircraft flying at low altitude and a speed of 1450 km/h heated up to 149 ° C.
- the normal separation of ammunition from the underwing holders is disrupted. Although this issue, according to foreign experts, has not yet been properly studied, flight tests of bomb racks with forced dropping of bombs and bomb clusters showed that the separation of the latter occurred with a delay and there were cases of their rotation around the transverse axis at a certain flight speed. Rotating the cassette could result in it hitting the plane.
- the ability to maneuver the aircraft is reduced, especially with ammunition suspended on external underwing holders. Thus, when the roll is limited, the effectiveness of anti-aircraft and anti-missile maneuvers decreases.
- The lack of sufficiently accurate navigation systems and weapon control systems that could automatically ensure the error-free delivery of an aircraft flying at super speed and at low altitude to the target and the release of ammunition at the right moment;
- Pilot fatigue. Experimental flights conducted in the USA showed that even at high transonic speed and low altitude manual control On an airplane, the pilot becomes very tired and after 15-20 minutes loses the necessary performance and quick reaction. In addition, during maneuvering (due to large turning radii), the aircraft may not reach the target.
Placement of ammunition only in bomb bays (no external sling). According to foreign press data, with such placement of ammunition, the indicators of angular velocity, roll and overload of the aircraft in flight do not change at all. Bombs can be dropped either singly or in series with an interval of up to 50 ms at a speed of M=1.3. In the future, the speed of the aircraft is expected to be increased to M=2.
Bombs intended to be suspended in a bomb bay do not necessarily need to have a good aerodynamic shape. They are shorter than usual due to the absence of bulky stabilizers, so they can be loaded into the bomb bay in more. The trajectory of such bombs is more vertical, which increases the time required for the pilot to identify the target and aim at it. In the bomb bay, ammunition is protected from overheating (the temperature there does not exceed 71°C).
The foreign press reported, for example, that in the bomb bay of the F-111 fighter-bomber there are two holders for nuclear bombs. By installing three additional holders, five M117 bombs can be hung with the ogive part backwards. This can be done due to the fact that the length of a regular bomb is 2286 mm, and a degraded bomb without a stabilizer is 1320 mm. Currently, the option of mounting seven such ammunition without any modification of the bomb bay has already been studied.
Improvement and creation of ammunition suspension systems
The vast majority of tactical fighters do not have internal bomb bays, so foreign countries are paying attention to improving external bomb bays and creating new ones.Improvement consists mainly in reducing their aerodynamic drag. One such suspension system, created in the USA for installation on F-4 and F-111 aircraft, was reported in the foreign press. With the system in place, for example, the maximum speed of an F-4 aircraft at low altitude increases by 20%, the range of overloads when taking off a 20-ton aircraft expands from -1 to +5, and the combat radius of the flight when performing various tasks increases by 4-16% . The foreign press did not report on the supersonic flight of a tactical fighter with this system.
The American company Boeing has created and tested the so-called “conformal bomb rack”, which is a large pallet located under the lower part of the fuselage of the F-4 aircraft. Up to 12 bomb racks with forced bomb release are mounted on a pallet. Its weight is about 450 kg. The pallet's bomb racks can carry 12 500-pound Mk82 bombs, or the same number of bomb clusters 2, or nine 750-pound shortened bombs with poor aerodynamic shape. When hanging bombs with high drag, a fairing is installed in front of the bombs.
Special tests showed that the performance of the F-4 aircraft in flight (with flaps and landing gear retracted) with 12 bombs suspended on a “conformal holder” was only 10% lower than nominal. At speed M=1.6 and high altitude the bombs were reliably separated, the aircraft's pitch angle remained virtually unchanged.
However, according to representatives of the company, when using such a bomb rack, it becomes difficult to quickly hang bombs and equip them with fuses. In addition, aircraft maintenance becomes more complicated.
Integrated development of aircraft and ammunition
Until now, in the USA and other capitalist countries, according to foreign press reports, there is no single comprehensive system for developing a carrier aircraft and ammunition for it. At first it was usually created new type supersonic, highly maneuverable aircraft, to which the ammunition suspension was then adapted various types. Moreover, the designers sought to ensure placement on it as much as possible more weapon options. As a result of this, the aircraft with a combat load became subsonic.The following example was given in the foreign press. If an F-4 aircraft takes on board 7260 kg of combat cargo, then it will be able to fly at high altitude at a speed of no more than 800 km/h, and maximum speed It reaches 2350 km/h only if it has two air-to-air missiles on it. That is why military experts are now putting forward the concept of joint development of an aircraft and its weapons. It involves the creation of an “aircraft-weapon” system, the most appropriate from the point of view of its main purpose. In this case, it is determined performance characteristics aircraft and ammunition, optimal options for combat load and its placement with the least disruption to the aerodynamics of the aircraft.
Flight route selection and programming
Flight at supersonic speed is impossible without careful preparation. Foreign experts believe that when planning it, it is necessary to take into account not only fuel consumption, time, airspeed, the type of attack (from level flight, diving and pitching), the type and quantity of ammunition, but also the enemy’s air defense system.To program a flight route, it is important to select it best option. The American company Bakker-Raymo proposed choosing a route by modeling it using a computer and an electronic indicator. The indicator displays a map of the area, the location of targets and the positions of anti-aircraft weapons.
Based on the information stored in the computer, radar blackout zones are displayed on the screen. The flight route is laid manually based on the minimum time the aircraft remains in the radar detection zones.
The problem of choosing the optimal route is solved as follows. The target at which you plan to strike is left on the screen. Then it displays the locations of the positions of those air defense systems that can affect the final result of the mission. For the selected flight altitude, areas not visible by radar are reproduced, and a route is selected against this background. Routes for other flight altitudes are built in the same sequence. In the process of modeling, taking into account the air situation, the composition of strike groups and jammers, as well as their speeds, is specified. Foreign experts recommend repeating the modeling process many times, introducing various refinements into the flight mode.
Use of simulators
Pilot training on simulators for flights at supersonic speeds has great importance. According to the foreign press, they provide an opportunity to instill in crews the skills to fly over the terrain of the future theater of operations and practice options for deviating from planned routes. Pilots also learn to quickly respond to changing conditions and navigate the flight. In addition, the aircraft resource is saved.So, judging by the materials of the foreign press, work is underway in the United States in various directions with the goal of overcoming enemy air defenses with combat aircraft at supersonic speeds and low altitudes The best option The solution to this problem is considered to be complete automation of the flight process and ammunition release. On completing this difficult task The efforts of many specialists are concentrated abroad.
During the official visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to Indonesia, which took place in early September, about ten memorandums and agreements were signed, the main one of which was the agreement to provide Jakarta with a loan of $1 billion for purchases Russian weapons And military equipment, in particular, Su-27SKM and Su-30MK2 fighters. During an official speech to the press, the presidents of both countries confirmed their interest in developing bilateral cooperation in the field of high technology, including the joint implementation of space projects. This means, among other things, a “green light” for implementation famous project“Air Launch”, which acquired international status. It involves launching small spacecraft into orbit using a launch vehicle, launched not from the Earth as usual, but from an altitude of about 10 km - after landing from the An-124-YuOVS Ruslan carrier aircraft. The first space “air launch” is scheduled for 2010.
How it all began…
The Air Launch aviation rocket and space complex (ARSC) project was started ten years ago, in 1997, by the Kompomash company. In 1999, for its implementation, the Air Start corporation was created, the founders of which were the Polet airline, the Rocket and Space Corporation (RSC) Energia and the Design Bureau of Chemical Automation (KBHA). The cooperation also included SNPRKTs "C SKB - Progress" and a number of other enterprises. RSC Energia became the lead developer of the launch vehicle, called Polet.
Initially, the air-launched rocket was planned to use fuel based on liquid oxygen (LO) and liquefied natural gas (LNG), but by 2000 it was decided to use the more traditional LOC-kerosene pair. In 1999, by decision of Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov, for the implementation of the Air Launch project, the Air Force transferred four An-124 military transport aircraft. Two Ruslans were repaired, modernized into the An-124-100 variant and entered into service with Polet Airlines on a commercial basis, earning money for the project. But the repair of the remaining two vehicles was frozen by the decision of Air Force Commander-in-Chief Vladimir Mikhailov.
After leaving the project due to technical disagreements, RSC Energia became the lead developer of the rocket and space segment of the complex. V.P. Makeeva". ARKK's "Air Launch" project went through all stages of defense before the competent commissions and was included in the Federal Space Program of the Russian Federation for 2006-2015. with financing on an extra-budgetary basis and with a commissioning date of 2010.
Features of the concept
Distinctive features complex "Air Launch" is air launch LV by airdropping it from the cargo compartment of the carrier aircraft. The advantages of the project compared to existing traditional ground-launch launch vehicles are, first of all, the high specific mass characteristics of the rocket (in terms of the payload being launched) with relatively low costs of creation and operation: there is no need to build expensive ground-based launch complexes or select a launch route more free, and the fields of fall of detachable parts of the carrier are reduced and can be located outside areas of residence or economic activity (for example, in the sea or in the desert). In addition, launching from a carrier aircraft makes it possible to improve the energy capabilities of the complex due to the launch with a non-zero initial speed, as well as by significantly reducing aerodynamic losses and losses due to off-design operation of the rocket engines.
Currently, the preliminary design of the Air Launch ARSC is almost completed. True, the Polet launch vehicle recently underwent another, and significant, change in layout. At the international aerospace salon MAKS-2007, the Air Start company demonstrated the next iteration of the project.
The previous configuration was a “bicaliber” arrangement: the modernized block “I” (third stage) of the Soyuz-2 launch vehicle with a diameter of 2.66 m was used as the second stage, while the first stage, developed by the State Research Center “Design Bureau named after. V.P. Makeev”, according to the project, should have a diameter of 3.2 m.
The new version of the rocket is now made in a single diameter - 2.66 m. Accordingly, the volumetric layout of the first stage block has also changed. The lower bottom of the fuel tank lost the shape of a garrot recessed into the tank and became conical, at the same time performing the function of a sub-engine frame to which the NK-43M engine is attached (developed in the second half of the 70s by the N.D. Kuznetsov SNTK for the second stage of a super-heavy "lunar" rocket N-1). Obviously, the decrease in diameter led to a slight increase in the length of the carrier. However, the Polet rocket, together with the transport and launch container, is freely placed in the cargo compartment of the An~ 124-100BC carrier aircraft.
It must be assumed that reducing the diameter of the first stage block and increasing the aspect ratio will have a beneficial effect on the aerodynamic characteristics of the rocket. But the main thing, I think, is not this. Obviously, the transition to a single diameter for both stages is associated with production and technological reasons. At the Progress plant (Samara), where launch vehicles of the Soyuz family are manufactured and where it is planned to produce the Polet rocket, there is no equipment for the manufacture of compartments with a diameter of 3.2 m. In principle, there are no technical “contraindications” to creating new equipment, but in any case, the transition to a new diameter leads to additional costs and delays in project implementation. The use of existing equipment makes it possible to manufacture tanks for the first stage of Polet from sections of the tank compartment of block I, which naturally leads to cost reduction and increased economic efficiency project.
The decision to switch to a diameter of 2.66 m may serve as indirect evidence that the project “ Air launch» has come close to the stage of pilot production and the beginning of flight design tests (FDT).
It can be assumed that the most difficult technically will be the landing of a launch vehicle weighing at least 100 tons using a steam and gas generator (“mortar” launch) and turning on the powerful oxygen-kerosene engine of the first stage in the air. It is known that the An-124 is not intended for landing monocargoes weighing more than 20 tons. How the carrier aircraft will behave when “ejecting” a rocket filled with tens of tons of kerosene and oxygen is not yet known. American ARKK projects of this type, for example, those created under the Quickrich program ( It should be noted that in addition to the general advantages of air launch systems, the Polet launch vehicle project has a number of its own advantages. Firstly, this is the use of ready-made elements: the NK-43M and RD-0124 engines, which have undergone a large amount of ground testing (and the RD-0124 has already been tested in the Soyuz-2.1b flight), the control system (also from the Soyuz-2 ", with the necessary adaptation), head fairing from the Molniya launch vehicle. Almost the only new element of the rocket is the first stage fuel compartment. The design of the upper stage, required for launches into geostationary orbit (GSO), also uses proven technical solutions. In particular, it is planned to use the RD-0158 engine, developed by KBHA based on the camera from RD-0124. As a result, the cost of creating a rocket should be only 120-130 million dollars. Due to its fairly high energy capabilities and economic efficiency, the ARKK “Air Start” project has attracted the attention of a number of developing countries in Southeast Asia, and, first of all, Indonesia. This is a state located on thousands of islands of the Malay Archipelago and the western part of the island. New Guinea (Irian Jaya), bordering Malaysia to the north and Papua New Guinea to the east, with a population of more than 242 million people, is vitally interested in the development of telecommunications technologies and monitoring systems for its territory. Nothing better has been invented so far than satellites for these purposes. Malaysia, as well as a number of developing countries in Africa, are also showing interest in the project. In principle, the relatively cheap and effective “Air Start” is precisely designed for such customers. So far, the most realistic and “advanced” project is the operation of the “Air Launch” based at the airfield of Biak Island (Indonesia). Preliminary Russian-Indonesian agreements on this were reached at the end of 2005. At the end of November - beginning of December 2006, during the visit of Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to our country, an “Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the Republic of Indonesia on cooperation in the field of exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes.” In March of this year, a working meeting between the President of the Air Launch Corporation Anatoly Karpov and the Head of the Indonesian National Institute of Aeronautics and Space (LAPAN) Adi Sadewo Salatun took place in Jakarta. As a result of the efforts made by both parties, on April 16, during the international fair in Hannover, an agreement was signed on the formation of an international company to implement the Air Start project. Thus, government support for this interesting project was received, which gave Anatoly Karpov grounds to express confidence that “Air Start” has entered the final stage of its implementation. On September 28 of this year, Karpov literally stated the following: “All the main problems have been solved; investment agreements have been concluded, a license for space activities has been obtained, and Roscosmos has approved the terms of reference; We've reached the finish line." At the same time, the president of the Airy Start corporation noted that everything that depends on Roscosmos “is being done quite quickly.” The necessary infrastructure for basing Ruslan and carrying out work on payloads is already being created on the island of Biak - first of all, there is an excellent 1st class airfield (used periodically for intermediate landings of Boeing 747 type aircraft when flying from Asian countries to the USA), and also allocated 24 hectares of land. As it became known, the costs of the Indonesian side will amount to about $25 million. The Russian contribution consists of intellectual property, work related to the conversion of the aircraft, costs for the carrier and control system, as well as equipping the airfield with ground equipment to prepare the rocket for flight. In October 2006, a joint venture was created to manage the program on a parity basis: risks, costs and income will be divided 50/50. As for the preparation of carrier aircraft, the normal operation of the ARKK involves the completion of repairs of the two remaining Ruslans and their transfer to the parent company - the State Research Center "Design Bureau named after. Makeev" for the purpose of conversion into air launch platforms. Anatoly Karpov believes that when conversion work begins in 2009, one of the existing Ruslans will have to be “removed from freight traffic.” It is possible that this copy can be made convertible: “When there are no launches, it can be used for cargo transportation, while some of the equipment for air launch will remain... But it weighs little, and will not significantly interfere with the solution of cargo transportation problems,” - says the president of the corporation and general director of Polet airline. He believes that satellite launches "will generate much more revenue" than cargo transportation, so it may make sense to use one or two aircraft exclusively for Air Launch. The start of flight tests of the Air Launch complex with the first space launch is planned to begin in 2010. According to available information, a contract for the launch of six small communication satellites for customers in the countries of Southeast Asia and southern Africa has already been signed. A tender for the production of spacecraft has also been announced: Russian enterprises and the EADS concern are participating in it. True, the details of the contract and other details have not yet been disclosed. According to Anatoly Karpov, all issues were agreed upon during the above-mentioned visit of Vladimir Putin to Indonesia. Problems related to the protection of technologies are expected to be resolved by a Decree of the President of the Russian Federation, after which a corresponding agreement will be concluded between Russia and Indonesia. When launched from the island of Biak, located only 70 km from the equator, the Polet launch vehicle will be able to deliver a satellite weighing up to 4 tons to low orbits, and a satellite weighing up to 800 kg to GS O or from flight trajectories (to the planets of the Solar System). Launches to sun-synchronous orbits are also possible, with both “northern” and “southern” launch azimuths. Fortunately, the launch routes are located primarily over the sea. Meanwhile, the market for light satellites, and, accordingly, light carriers, is one of the most unstable and unpredictable segments of the space market. The Air Launch project itself arose in the mid-90s on a wave of enthusiasm, if not euphoria, associated with the expectation of a sharp increase in the need for small spacecraft. The main hopes were pinned on the creation of low-orbit constellations of communication satellites. Forecasts promised the launch of at least 2,000 such devices within 15 years. But hopes for the economic efficiency of such satellites were not justified, and the rainbow “soap bubble” burst... Recently, forecasts, much more cautious and balanced than a decade ago, promise the need to launch 600 small satellites over the next 10 years. Firstly, some low-orbit constellations of telecommunications satellites, for example GlobalStar, were nevertheless deployed and now require periodic replenishment. Secondly, progress in microelectronics makes it possible to create satellites of small mass, but with functionality similar to the “large” satellites developed in the 90s. last century. In particular, meter-resolution Earth remote sensing satellites weighing only hundreds of kilograms have already been created and, we note, are enjoying increasing popularity (for example, the Israeli Ofek weighs no more than 300 kg!). In addition, a number of space companies are already seriously considering the possibility of creating geostationary platforms in the “mini-” or even “microsatellite” size. Of course, the demand for such devices is quite limited, but it exists. We must not forget that many developing countries that want to join the benefits of space technology simply do not have the necessary financial resources to purchase “full-size” devices, but have a passionate desire (or even, like Indonesia, an urgent need) to obtain and use such satellites. For these countries, the use of small devices launched by light rockets is a good option. So, if successful, Air Launch has a good chance of gaining a foothold in this newly emerging market. Vladimir SHCHERBAKOV The giant Stratolaunch Model 351 transport aircraft, designed to launch launch vehicles from an altitude of 9,100 meters, was first taken out of a hangar in the Mojave Desert (California). This was announced on May 31 in a statement distributed by the Internet portal Space.com Gene Floyd, CEO of Stratolaunch Systems Corp.. The vehicle, created by Orbital OTK Corporation, is equipped with six Pratt&Whitney PW4056 engines and consists of two fuselages, each 72 meters long, connected by a common wing 117 meters long. The weight of the aircraft itself is 250 tons, and with a full load - 590 tons. Thus, the Stratolaunch Model 351 aircraft in terms of wingspan surpasses the Soviet An-225 Mriya, which was still the largest aircraft in the world, with a wingspan of 88.4 m (the An-225 still retains the advantage in length (84 m) and maximum take-off weight (640 tons). We remind you that it first took to the air in 1988. The aircraft is intended to be used as a carrier for the Stratolaunch aerospace system, created by the American company Stratolaunch Systems, founded by the co-founder of Microsoft Paul Allen and the famous aircraft designer Burt Rutan. The first demonstration launch from Stratolaunch is expected in 2019. At the first stage it will carry one Pegasus XL launch vehicle, and in the future - up to three rockets. However, the situation with launch vehicles (LVs) is not entirely clear. During the aircraft's rollout ceremony, Floyd said the company would be "actively exploring a broad range of launch vehicles to provide greater flexibility for customers." The Russian military blog bmpd, maintained by specialists from the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST), notes that the lightweight Orbital ATK Pegasus XL rocket has long been used for air launches from the Stargazer aircraft, so there is no particular need to create a giant carrier. Another thing is that back in 2014, Sierra Nevada Corporation announced the development of a smaller version of its Dream Chaser light manned shuttle project for use with Stratolaunch. As experts note, space technology is rapidly decreasing in size and current rockets, adapted for heavy satellites, are already launching 10, 12, 17 devices. In this sense, launching mini-satellites by air launch is beneficial for several reasons. Firstly, a rocket of such a complex does not need a first booster stage, which overcomes the “heavy” layer of the atmosphere for the first 10 kilometers. Secondly, there is no need to wait for the entire package of satellites to be assembled, as is the case with a ground launch. Thirdly, satellites can be launched from places as close as possible to the equator and to a point in orbit, while ground launches require much more infrastructure. Military analysts believe that the Americans have always tried to lead in the air launch segment not only because they wanted to make satellite launches fast and cheap. This is extremely important for defense: in the event of an escalation of the situation and some kind of conflict, you can almost instantly launch a satellite to the desired point, and the device will provide the necessary information about the enemy. Testing systems for peaceful space allows us to conduct experiments with hypersonic vehicles capable of reaching any point on the planet and entering low-Earth orbit. “At a minimum, air-launched systems allow satellites to be launched online if the ground launch sites are damaged,” notes Andrei Frolov, a researcher at the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, editor-in-chief of the Arms Export magazine. — The United States has been working for a long time on the possibility of air-launching strategic ICBM missiles, dropping the Minuteman IA from a C-5A military transport aircraft, and later a prototype eMRBM ballistic missile. In this case, we are talking about a platform on which you can hang both a launch vehicle and a hypersonic vehicle, the main thing is that they fit in size. Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Cosmonautics named after. Tsiolkovsky Andrey Ionin recalls that the group of billionaire Paul Allan has already won the Ansari X Prize competition for government and commercial structures, when within two weeks they had to go into space twice on the same vehicle. — At that time, the designer of the system was also Burt Rutan, a brilliant aircraft designer who makes not serial, but record-breaking aircraft. It was his Voyager spacecraft that made the first non-stop flight around the globe without refueling. Then for a long time Rutan and the billionaire Richard Branson worked as part of the Virgin Galactic project, which involves organizing tourist suborbital space flights and launches of small artificial satellites using the SpaceShipTwo spacecraft and the WhiteKnightTwo booster aircraft. In 2011, it became known that Rutan had switched to Stratolaunch. And what's interesting is that this huge plane is similar to the one that Virgin Galactic had. Stratolaunch Model 351 transport aircraft (Photo: stratolaunch.com) Thus, we see a kind of battle of Anglo-Saxon billionaires: on the one hand, Paul Allen with Stratolaunch, on the other, Elon Musk with his return Falcon 9 rockets, and Richard Branson with Virgin Galactic on the third. Another thing is that at present the problem is not with launch vehicles, but with the launch market itself. For example, Stratolaunch will also compete in the market with other launch vehicles in the segment of launching small satellites into low orbits. Of course, if projects like OneWeb (a constellation of a large number of satellites, which is expected to provide users around the world with broadband Internet) are implemented, then there will be a demand for a large number of launches. “SP”: — Do you think that this project is a record-breaking one and is unlikely to make a revolution in the launch market? — The simultaneous launch of three rockets with payloads may be in demand on the market, but so far the launch market is not that big. Therefore, I don’t think that now anyone will dare to compete with such systems, especially since the Americans themselves can use already proven aircraft for air launch of launch vehicles. In this regard, the prospects for Russian air launch projects are extremely difficult to assess. In addition, the Stratolaunch program involves the use of solid-fuel rockets, which are suspended on pylons between the bodies of an aircraft made in tandem. In our case, the emphasis was on liquid rockets, which require that the launch aircraft must have a refueling system on board. These missiles were located inside the aircraft body, problems with separation, etc. had to be solved. Scientific director of the Space Policy Institute Ivan Moiseev has a different opinion - the market for launching small satellites is promising even without the implementation of projects like OneWeb. “Currently, most of the satellites are launched by accompanying loads, and the cluster launch of a large number of satellites is inconvenient because you need to wait a long time until orders are collected to launch a heavy rocket. In addition, the orbit here is already fixed: whatever load is being transported, small loads will also go to it. Air-launched launches of light missiles and ground-based launches of ultra-light missiles (on May 27, the Electron ultra-light launch vehicle was tested in New Zealand) are free of such disadvantages, and therefore are quite promising in economic terms. The small satellite launch market is growing rapidly and has a fairly positive outlook. The Americans launch the Pegasus launch vehicle rarely, but regularly using the Stargazer aircraft. At the same time, the mass of the payload put into orbit is less than 500 kg (443 kg). “SP”: — Then what is the difference between the Stratolaunch project? “Its advantage is the ability to launch several rockets from one flight, which means it will be possible to launch satellites into fundamentally different orbits. Secondly, with the payloads that such a powerful aircraft can lift, it is possible to launch heavier satellites. Including military purposes. “SP”: — So far, only Americans launch launch vehicles using air launch. But in March, Li Tongyu, head of the launch vehicle development department of the China Academy of Launch Vehicle Technology (CALT), said his country intended to develop a new family of space rockets launched from Y-20 aircraft. — I think that the Chinese were negotiating with the Ukrainians about the purchase of the Mriya aircraft also for similar purposes. So far, no information has leaked out from Beijing about specific developments in hardware, but the peculiarity of Chinese space is that it is very difficult to predict anything. As a rule, the Chinese are silent until the rocket takes off. As for Russia, we had two programs. The first involved the use of the An-124 Ruslan transport aircraft and the Polet launch vehicle, assembled on the basis of jet engines developed in Soviet times. Such an aircraft rocket complex for space purposes was to be based at the airbase of Biak Island (Indonesia), as close as possible to the equator, which simplifies and reduces the cost of launching spacecraft into orbit. The second is the Russian-Kazakh project “Ishim”, which was based on the project of a satellite fighter - the MiG-31D interceptor with a special missile. “Ishim” included two aircraft carriers - the MiG-31I with a three-stage launch vehicle suspended between the engine nacelles, and an airborne command and measurement complex based on the Il-76MD aircraft. “Ishim” was technically ready for launch, and in a fairly short time, but in 2007 Kazakhstan announced its abandonment of a joint project with Russia to create an aviation rocket and space complex. But it is quite easy to revive it if there is economic interest. True, here again the question of payloads will arise, since Western companies are not eager to cooperate with us and they have a wide range of launches. The Sportbox.ru columnist appreciated Houston's performance at the start of the NBA season and recommends that fans enjoy the Texans' game and not think about the playoffs. On Wednesday they lost in a stubborn confrontation, which triggered another wave of speculation about how seriously the “rocket men” should be taken. After the defeat, it would seem that the answer to this question should have crystallized by itself, but no. Firstly, the Spurs really had to reveal to the world the entire contents of their own intestines in order to crush Houston (102:100), and, secondly, this was preceded by a ten-game winning streak, during which the “Rocket Men” made souvenirs from cartilage and joints of the Warriors, Nuggets, Celtics, Thunder and other teams that do not fall into the category of whipping boys. This result was achieved thanks to the third-best attack in the entire league (ahead of only Golden State and Toronto) and, in particular, historically outstanding long-range shooting. In a recent matchup with the Pelicans, the Texans hit a record 24 shots from beyond the arc on a record 61 attempts. Already now, after the first quarter of the championship, Houston has every chance of breaking the record for the number of three-pointers made in a season. The reason for such a successful flight? First of all, Mike D'Antoni, who has shaved his mustache but still always believes in the triumph of offensive basketball. “Mr. Pringles” is already being called the main contender for the award for the best coach of the season. Let's forget for a moment about his idea to promote him to the position of point guard - there is nothing revolutionary here. It is much more important that D’Antoni found the role players he needed and managed to breathe life into even those of them whom many considered biotrash. Eric Gordon speaks most convincingly and clearly about this, who in recent years has been mentioned exclusively as the mascot of the Pelicans medical headquarters. After 27 matches, with an average playing time of 33.1 minutes, he made 101 three-pointers with an accuracy of 39.6 percent. Eric Gordon made 100 three-pointers at the same level and an average of 30 minutes, shooting 44.2 percent. Just numbers, no specific attacks on anyone. Considering the injury history of the defenseman, we have yet to see his decline, but if at the end of the season the number of games in which Gordon came off the bench exceeds the games he started, he will be a strong candidate for the award for the best sixth man. The Rockets are currently grieving Clint Capela, who is out for six weeks with a broken leg. There is a reason. Under D'Antoni, the usual unskilled center returned to the norm of 12 points and 8.3 rebounds on average per game. Ryan Anderson, Sam Decker, Montrezl Harrell are all performing at a level that exceeds preseason expectations. The most difficult thing is in the simple. Raja Bell, who played under D’Antoni in that same Phoenix, recently spoke about the head coach’s approach: “He gives unconditional freedom to each of his basketball players. When I came on board, he said, “I'm missing the 218 three-pointers that Joe Johnson and Quentin Richardson used to make. Can you?” I agreed, although I had never thrown more than 114 in a season before.” The most amazing thing is how, with this approach to each player, D’Antoni maintains balance and avoids scandals and insults in the locker room. He's just honest. In one of the matches, Leandro Barbosa attacked like crazy from difficult situations, through his hands, while not sharing the ball in situations where it was obvious. I approached the coach and said that Leandro should pass to his partners more often. He pulled me aside and said, “Yes, Raj, you’re absolutely right. But if I tell him about it now, it will shake his confidence. Next time he will waste time doubting what to do in a game situation. I believe in him, believe me too.” Leandro finished that match with a monstrous shooting percentage and an accurate winning shot in the last seconds. That's how D'Antoni's system works, and it's the perfect environment for "The Beard," who really shouldn't be considered a professional basketball player. Harden is more of a professional artist who expresses himself through acting. So when he’s asked to talk about his relationship with D’Antoni, his answer sounds childishly direct: “He doesn’t try to control everyone and everything. The coach prescribes a combination, and if I have a better idea, I tell him about it, and he takes the situation calmly. The same should apply to others.” Harden returns his coach's trust not only in the form of high scoring (27.8 points per game), the tufted bearded man leads the league in total and average number of assists (11.7 per game), and also ranks first in the scoring rating after extra- passes, to put it simply, it is from Harden’s passes that they score most often and most of all. In the last couple of weeks, James has been hitting triple-doubles frequently and is generally playing at the level of a season MVP contender. Taking a look at all this controlled chaos, it’s time to say - there are so many contenders for individual awards, so maybe it’s time to take aim at the team championship? Alas, the Rockets, who play according to the Brazilian system “You score as much as you can, and we score as much as we want,” have never learned to defend. The entire defense of the back line rests entirely solely on Patrick Beverley - a player who is as hardworking and persistent as he is traumatic. In one single game, the Rockets are capable of outrunning and outshooting even the Warriors - it's proven. In a seven-game series, with the tempo slowed down—games slow down in the playoffs due to the focus on defense—with an elite man-to-man team focused solely on Harden, the Rockets would crack. Plus, for all its progress, Houston’s roster can hardly be called deep. This is truly the reincarnation of the brilliant “Phoenix” with Steve Nash, Amare Stoudemire, Shawn Marion and others, this is basketball purified from impurities, tickling the olfactory organs with pleasure, one hundred percent high-quality product from Uncle Mike. But such teams don't win championships. And don’t even try to point a finger at Golden State, just remember who became the MVP of the finals won: today’s Houston does not have players like Iguodala, Green, Bogut, a long bench, and most importantly, understanding and experience of how to rebuild with such an attraction of attacking generosity on defensive, viscous, eye-stinging basketball, which reeks of sweat and vomiting. This is not the territory of the inspired creator that Harden is. The Rockets are so good right now because they don't have to break themselves, which is one of the main things in the playoffs. Therefore, no matter how fascinating the space odyssey of today's Rockets may look, it has its end point - at most, the second round of the playoffs. 60 years after the launch of Kongrev's last rocket, a military rocket was once again reborn into history in the mountains near Geok Tepe. It cannot, of course, be said that for such a long period of time military missiles did not exist at all. No, they existed, but they appeared rarely and were used hesitantly, mostly as an experiment or for lack of better means. The first attempt to reintroduce missiles into army service after the disbandment of all the old missile units was made in Sweden. Around 1890, Swedish inventor Lieutenant Colonel von Unge presented Alfred Nobel with a design for an “aerial torpedo,” which was a large rocket very similar to Gale's military rockets, but with minor changes and improvements. Von Unge set out to make the rocket a more effective weapon. To do this, he proposed igniting the rocket engine not from the rear, through the nozzle, but from the front, through a thin hole drilled in the nose of the rocket. Another, even more important innovation was to launch the rocket from a short-barreled mortar. In this case, the rocket would take off at a certain speed, say 100 m/sec, which would not only increase its range, but also increase the accuracy of the rockets, and this, according to von Unge, would give the rockets the opportunity to compete with artillery . Nobel's interest in von Unge's rockets was not purely academic. He put his compatriot to work, paying all his rapidly growing bills, which to a person with less capital than Nobel might seem prohibitive. However, despite significant expenses, von Unge was unable to complete any of his projects so that they could be shown to military specialists. In 1896, Nobel died, and von Unge was apparently left out of work. Five years later, in 1901, the Mars company was created in Stockholm, which set as its goal to give von Unge the opportunity to complete the work he had started. The results of these experiments were not published, but some facts became known later in a roundabout way. The powder charge of the von Unge rockets was the same as that of the coastal rescue rocket (linomet): it consisted of a mixture of black powder with crushed coal and was pressed into the rocket body by hand. The warhead with a dynamite charge was attached to the rocket body; the detonating fuse was triggered when the missile met the target (Fig. 28). Rice. 28. “Aerial torpedo” von Unge. Sectional view of the last 762 mm model tested by Krupp in 1909 The weight of the combat charge was 2 kg with a total length of the “air torpedo” of 750 mm and a diameter of 110 mm. Fully equipped, the first models weighed up to 35 kg, developed a speed of about 300 m/sec along the trajectory and had a range of up to 5 km. The mortar that served these “torpedoes” as a launcher gave them an initial speed of 50 m/sec, which was impossible to increase due to the design features of the “torpedoes” themselves. The accuracy of the fire was admittedly unsatisfactory. Experts have calculated that to hit a given target at a distance of 3 km with missiles required at least five times more ammunition than to hit the same target using a conventional field howitzer of the same caliber. Then von Unge decided to abandon the mortar altogether, and instead use an open tubular guide. In 1908, von Unge began advertising his "aerial torpedoes" as weapons for airships. At the same time, he emphasized the recoilless nature of “aerial torpedoes,” which is of great importance for aviation weapons. In 1909, it became known that Friedrich Krupp’s company in Essen had bought von Unge’s patents, as well as the existing stock of “aerial torpedoes” (about 100 pieces), a tubular guide and other equipment. All this was transported from Stockholm to the Krupp training ground in Meppen, where the “torpedoes” were subjected to comprehensive testing. Some data on the latest models of this missile were later reported by the leading Krupp ballistics specialist, Professor Otto Eberhard, during a discussion on the mathematical calculation of projectile trajectories. Eberhard said that “aerial torpedoes” had a starting weight of up to 50 kg and a firing range of about 4-5 km. In 1910, Krupp announced that experiments with von Unge’s “aerial torpedoes” had been stopped due to the impossibility of obtaining the required accuracy of fire. Of course, no one believed this statement, not least because just a few months earlier, Krupp's company had applied for a patent on this invention. It is possible that the application was a matter of principle, or perhaps it was the usual procedure of this large military-industrial company. In any case, the Germans did not have any weapons anything like von Unge’s “aerial torpedoes” during the First World War. In all likelihood, Krupn's engineers tried to convert von Unge's rockets into heavy artillery with a short range and, when this failed, they turned their attention to other means. The only country that used rockets on the battlefields of the First World War was France. Information about this can be found in the book of Captain Ernst Lehmann, who died in the Hindenburg airship disaster at Lakehurst. “During the first months of 1916,” writes Lehmann, “I was in command of the new airship LZ-90, one of the seven airships at the disposal of the army high command... One day we were given the task of bombing the railway depot at Bar-les- Du, through which the French supplied their troops defending key positions near Verdun. The LZ-90 airship carried a large supply of bombs (over 3000 kg). Turning off the engines and hiding in the clouds, we crossed the front line at an altitude of 3000 m. I do not know whether we were discovered or not, but in any case we appeared over Bar-le-Du unexpectedly from the enemy, who met us with only a few conventional shells. Before we had time to drop the first load of bombs, we were forced to stop bombing, as the LZ-90 slipped over the target. We made a new approach and were just about to launch a second strike on the station when we saw several clumsy yellow missiles slowly flying towards us. They passed our airship, which at that time was at an altitude of 3260 m, and continued to gain altitude. Incendiary rockets! The last and most reliable means of igniting an airship filled with hydrogen. One hit is certainly enough to destroy any airship! I ordered full speed ahead and, raising the airship to its maximum height, safely escaped the fire. I managed to notice that incendiary rockets were launched from the highway near the railway station and that the launchers were cars that were moving along the highway.” But the French created not only anti-aircraft missiles; they also did what von Unge tried to do - the first combat air-to-air missiles. True, this task was greatly facilitated by the presence of such vulnerable air targets as the airship and the balloon. Using the experience of the American Civil War, the Germans raised their observers in tethered balloons to adjust artillery fire. The stationary balloons were filled with hydrogen and sometimes illuminating gas, and the French easily destroyed them with the help of large rockets of the Le Prieur type, similar to those used to feed the cable from the shore to the ship. These missiles, apparently, did not even have special warheads: their incendiary effect was quite sufficient to destroy the balloon. An aircraft of the Nieuport type was used as a missile carrier - a biplane that had very strong V-shaped vertical struts on each side of the fuselage, which connected both wings. Four Le Prieur missiles were suspended from each strut. After a series of combat tests, the French formed several special squadrons of Nieuport aircraft armed with such missiles, but these squadrons did not last long, as the Germans soon stopped flying tethered balloons. I read somewhere that Russian pilots had similar weapons to fight the same targets. However, very few sources have survived that describe the operations of the Russian army during the First World War. Therefore, it remains to be assumed that Russian aircraft missiles were only the product of the inventive activity of individual pilots. On the Western Front, the Germans used large rockets to make passages in barbed wire. To do this, a cable was attached to the rear of the rocket, and a small boat anchor was attached to the warhead. The missile thus equipped was launched from the first trench through the wire fences, and then the anchor was pulled back using a hand winch. This is all that can be said about the military use of missiles during the First World War. The very limited use of military missiles in the First World War and their abundance in the Second are not explained by chance or by the narrowness of military thinking; nor can it be explained by any specific tactical doctrine. This difference is rather related to the solution of such industrial problems as problems of production, storage and safety of the fuel used. When Congreve defended himself against critics, he did so by comparing the performance of rockets with the costs of producing them. His figures were absolutely correct and convincing, but in modern conditions they would characterize only a very small part of the overall problem. Judging by the way things are now, any military missile must meet all the requirements for a standard military weapon. The first such requirement, often not noticed due to its obviousness, is the possibility of long-term storage of finished weapons. The weapon is manufactured, say, in Detroit, then it must be stored somewhere until it is sent to some arsenal or military base, where the question of its storage again arises. After some time it will probably be sent either to Africa or to Greenland and will again need storage. And finally, it will be delivered to the front line for the upcoming operation. During this time, the weapon, at least in theory, should be ready for immediate use. All artillery and small arms, from pistol cartridges to anti-aircraft gun rounds, meet this requirement. The second most important requirement is that the weapon must be in mass production, if possible, fully automated. If you think about these two basic requirements, it becomes clear why a liquid-propellant rocket can only be used as a combat rocket in some special cases. Of course, parts of a liquid-propellant rocket can be produced in mass production, and the rocket can be stored assembled or disassembled. But it would be very difficult to store a liquid-propellant rocket fueled, even if its fuel components do not contain liquid oxygen. The propellant components would have to be stored separately and not refueled with them until the missile was actually used. This is only possible in conditions of stationary firing positions, similar to the positions of anti-aircraft artillery defending populated areas, or the deck installations of missile-carrying ships. But this cannot be done near the front line. Thus, logically, combat missiles should be solid-fuel missiles, convenient for long-term storage, and at the same time meet the conditions of mass production. The last requirement for large black powder rockets was not met until 1935. The production of these missiles was manual and individual. Even Zander's completely perfect hydraulic presses freed the worker only from the use of muscular force. It was still artisanal and, at the same time, very dangerous work. Storing large black powder rockets was also extremely difficult. The rocket powder charge did not withstand long-term storage, unless, of course, special conditions were created. The reason for this is that for high-power powder rockets the powder mixture must be compressed to a much greater extent than for small pyrotechnic rockets. The specific gravity of a pyrotechnic rocket charge is approximately 1.25. The rockets produced by Sander for Opel's experiments had a specific gravity of about 1.5 or even 1.7. Of course, such a charge density improved the characteristics of the missiles, but due to this, the pressed powder mixture became excessively fragile, much more fragile than the usual one. If rockets with large pressed powder charges are subjected to temperature changes, the charge is likely to develop cracks that are invisible to the eye. When such a rocket is launched, its characteristics will be normal until the flame reaches the crack. Then the combustion surface will sharply increase due to the crack, which will lead to an equally sharp increase in gas formation. At best, unburnt - pieces of the powder mixture will be thrown out. But usually the rocket body cannot withstand a sudden increase in pressure, which increases even more if the nozzle becomes clogged with unburned pieces of gunpowder. It was precisely these cracks that caused explosions during Opel's experiments. A sudden drop in temperature, a little carelessness during transportation - and the rocket became explosive. That all this was not a purely academic concern is confirmed by the refusal of the German railways to transport these missiles. There was another problem: if the black powder rocket was large, then its body had to be made of metal, and when the burning lasted more than 1-2 seconds, the metal wall transferred enough heat to ignite the gunpowder at the point where the flame was still didn't get it. Every explosives specialist who was introduced to these problems, of course, immediately proposed a transition from pressed black powder to artillery powder. Everyone knows the pasta-shaped tubes of smokeless powder used in artillery ammunition. These thin and rather long tubes are distinguished by a certain strength and even flexibility. Powders of this type can withstand rough handling and very large temperature fluctuations. Obviously, the first person to begin such experiments with smokeless powders was Professor Goddard. He was primarily interested in the rate of exhaustion of combustion products of smokeless powders, wanting to obtain a basis for further calculations. It may be, however, that the first to try his hand at such rockets was Friedrich Sander. According to Max Vallier, who witnessed Zander's first experiments with smokeless powders, this happened shortly after the tests of Opel rocket cars. The first results were discouraging. After several seconds of even, but very violent combustion, an explosion usually occurred. I don't know what Zander's mistake was; perhaps it had the wrong mixture composition, or perhaps the part of the charge adjacent to the walls of the combustion chamber was heated more than necessary due to heat transfer from the metal walls. Probably, the too long length of Zander’s missiles also played some role in this. In any case, the problem turned out to be too complex for him to solve. Nevertheless, the speed of gas outflow in Zander’s rockets, according to the same Valier, was over 1800 m/sec. Later, during the Second World War, dual-base propellants were used as fuel in military rockets. This term requires some explanation. Initially, pyroxylin was chosen to replace gunpowder in guns. However, with every attempt to do this, the gun barrel burst. Obviously, the pyroxylin burned too quickly, and therefore it was necessary to somehow slow down the combustion process. This was done by immersing finely chopped pyroxylin in a vessel with acetone. Acetone did not dissolve pyroxylin, but softened it to a jelly-like state. This jelly-like mass was then mixed with ordinary charcoal, partially dried and rolled into thin sheets, which were cut into small squares or diamonds. This is how single-base gunpowder was prepared. The recipe for dual-base gunpowder was first compiled by Alfred Nobel and was called cordite, or ballistite. These terms are still used today, although the composition and manufacturing process of these gunpowders have changed several times since then. The two bases of cordite (ballistite) are two explosives - nitroglycerin and nitrocellulose (pyroxylin is a type of nitrocellulose). The main distinguishing feature of the production process of these substances is the gelatinization of nitrocellulose with the help of nitroglycerin. But since nitroglycerin is by no means the most perfect gelatinizer, additional reagents are used in the process of preparing these substances. English explosives specialists, for example, use diethyldiphenylurea, which in the English industry is known by the abbreviated name "carbamite". It is not only a gelatinizing component, but also an excellent stabilizer that neutralizes the decomposition products of nitrogen esters. Without it, dual base powder becomes unreliable or simply unsafe after some time. The following is the weight composition of English cordite: The cordite production process is usually called dry mortarless. Indeed, this process is solutionless, but not completely dry. Soft, shapeless pulp of nitrocellulose, which is moistened with water, is fed into a tank of water, where it is mixed and where the required amount of nitroglycerin is simultaneously introduced into it. After some time, this mixture is fed into another tank with carbamite, from where, after a short stirring, the resulting raw pulp is sent to drying tables, very similar to those used in paper production. Here the pulp is cut into sheets of a paste-like mass containing 20-25% water, which is evaporated when the sheets are dried with heated air. The dried sheets are then passed through heated rollers. Heat and pressure lead to gelatinization of the mass. After this, the gelatinized sheets are rolled under high pressure and placed in heated cylinders, from which they are extruded through a matrix. In the United States, the issue of using smokeless powder for rocket propellant charges was first raised in 1940. The US Army Ordnance Department needed a rocket propellant charge to accelerate the fall of aerial bombs, which, as is known, when falling from low altitudes, do not have sufficient speed at the moment of contact with the target, which does have an artillery shell of the same caliber. As a result, an aerial bomb dropped from a low altitude has little penetrating ability; As the bombing altitude increases, the accuracy of the bomb hitting the target is lost. Therefore, it seemed logical to equip the aerial bomb with a rocket charge in order to, while maintaining the accuracy of bombing, obtain a greater speed of meeting the target. A rocket booster designed for this purpose was created in the late spring of 1941, but practically such bombs were never used. The propellant charge in this rocket booster was a dibase propellant consisting of approximately 60% nitrocellulose and 40% nitroglycerin, with a small amount of diphenylamine added as a stabilizer. This gunpowder is similar to English rocket cordite, but the method of making it in America was completely different. The American method can be called solution-pressing and it boils down to the following: the constituent parts of gunpowder are prepared separately and then combined in the presence of a quickly evaporating solvent. This forms a thick layer of darkish paste, which is then easily rolled into sheets for gelatinization. After this, the sheets are cut to length into narrow strips and these strips are pressed. This process for producing dual-base gunpowder is considered safer than the English method. The Germans had also been familiar with dibasic gunpowders for a long time, but when Germany began to develop them in earnest, it was decided not to use nitroglycerin for the reasons that glycerin is extracted from fats, and in the event of a prolonged war, Germany would experience an acute shortage of them. Whatever the real reason, the Germans replaced nitroglycerin with a liquid known to chemists as diethylene glycol dinitrate. This liquid is less sensitive than nitroglycerin and therefore safer to handle, but has greater gelling power than nitroglycerin. In Germany, as in other countries, there was a constant need for larger rocket propellants, larger rockets, and larger aircraft launch rockets. In America this led to the appearance of so-called halsite fuels, and in Germany to the invention of the “Gissling Pulver” - a compound interesting in many respects. It was a special paste of nitrocellulose and diethylene glycol dinitrate with a certain amount of diphenylamine and carbamite. This raw paste was crushed and gradually added to the trinitrotoluene melted in the bath while constantly stirring the mixture. Below is the final composition of the gunpowder prepared in this way. Next, the hot mixture entered a vacuum, where air and water were removed from it. After this, it was poured into steel molds and subjected to slow and controlled cooling for 24-48 hours. Pouring into molds made it possible to produce charges of exceptionally large sizes. Some experimental charges had a length of up to 100 cm and a diameter of over 50 cm. In 1942, Russian newspapers published the first photographs of strange German weapons captured on the Russian front. It had six short barrels about 1.5 m long, which were mounted on a lightweight modified carriage of a 37 mm anti-tank gun and resembled the drum of an old Colt revolver. This somewhat strange system was a new German rocket weapon. Officially it was called “Nebelwerfer-41”, that is, “gazomet”, or a smoke emission device of the 1941 model. The name indicated that this weapon was originally intended for use as a chemical mortar to create smoke screens. However, reports from the front indicated that this weapon was used as a mortar to fire high-explosive fragmentation mines. Later, chemical shells for this weapon were also captured, confirming its original purpose. Rice. 29. German missiles of the Second World War. At the top is a Nebelwerfer-41 rocket; in the center is a larger version of the Nebelwerfer missile; below - the Wurfgeret rocket The total length of the projectile slightly exceeded 100 cm (Fig. 29), and its total weight was 36 kg. The powder charge was placed in the head and consisted of seven smokeless powder sticks, each 400 mm long and 40 mm in diameter with a hole in the center with a diameter of 6.35 mm. The powder charge weighed about 6 kg. The projectile had a caliber of 15 cm. The launch time from all six barrels was, according to reports from the front, an average of 6 seconds, but German instructions indicated a much lower rate of fire. The maximum firing range slightly exceeded 5000 m. The accuracy of fire was good, but, of course, inferior to the accuracy of artillery guns of the same caliber. The main disadvantage of the Nebelwerfer was that it greatly unmasked itself when fired; the flame of the rocket powder charge, escaping through the open breech of the launch tubes, reached 12 m in length and was extremely bright. The active part of the rocket's trajectory was 140 m, and even in the daytime, when the light from the rocket engine's torch was not so noticeable, when it was launched, a large cloud of dust rose, unmasking the firing position. About a year after the appearance of the 15 cm Nebelwerfer, a larger 21 cm caliber rocket mortar of a slightly modified design was created. In the shell of this mortar, the rocket powder charge was placed in the tail section. Instead of tubular bombs, the projectile had one large powder charge weighing 6.6 kg, 413 mm long and almost 130 mm in diameter. On the peripheral part of the charge there were eight grooves and eight longitudinal channels in a circle, as well as one central axial channel. Below is the weight composition of this charge. The firing range of this heavier mortar was approximately 1000 m greater than the firing range of the 15 cm Nebelwerfer. Several types of launching devices were created for the new projectile. One was similar to the first Nebelwerfer, but had only five launch tubes, also located in a circle. There was another launcher in which five launch tubes were placed in a row. Then a launcher appeared on a railway platform, with two rows of tubes, five in each row. By this time, a fundamentally new rocket system had been created, called the “Schweres Wurfgeret” (heavy throwing device). This weapon used a jet engine, a 21 cm projectile, in combination with a 32 cm warhead filled with a mixture of oil and gasoline (about 42 liters). The entire projectile looked like the battle club of ancient heroes and weighed over 90 kg. "Wurfgeret" began to arrive to the troops as separate shells, in a special package that served as a launcher. This packaging frame was placed in an inclined position, and the Wurfgeret was ready for launch. A heavy incendiary “bomb”, driven by its own engine, could fly over a distance of over 1800 m. Later, several such 32-cm shells were found, marked at the head with yellow crosses; The Germans used this sign to indicate mustard gas. But when the found shells were opened by chemical service specialists, they also contained a mixture of oil and gasoline. Launching rocket projectiles from packaging frames was quite satisfactory in terms of accuracy only on test sites; on the battlefield, such shells turned out to be ineffective. Then the Germans put together six frames in two rows (three in each row) and installed them on a gun carriage, hoping to thus improve the accuracy of fire and ensure greater massing of it. Around the same time, a smaller version of the Wurfgeret was created with a warhead with a diameter of 28 cm, filled with high explosive. In addition to the Nebelwerfer and Wurfgeret, the Germans had 8 cm caliber aircraft rockets and several samples of 8.6 cm caliber flares. We will not touch on their design, but instead consider another rocket, which had, in my opinion, a very original design. This is a 21.4cm R-LG flare. It was developed by the laboratories of the Navy High Command together with the Rheinmetall-Borzig company (Dusseldorf). The rocket resembled an artillery shell and had a length of about 1 m. The powder charge was made in the form of one thick-walled tubular block 50 cm long with an external diameter of 20 cm and an internal diameter of 10 cm. Inside this wide channel was placed a metal tube with a lighting charge and a parachute. The maximum flight altitude of the missile was approximately 5000 m, the maximum horizontal range was 7500 m. It was assumed that this missile would be able to carry a high-explosive fragmentation charge in its warhead. The development of the rocket was completed only at the time of Germany's surrender, and it was not put into production. The Russians made extensive use of rocket weapons from the very beginning of the war, but most of their systems were highly classified. The scale of the use of missiles can be judged at least by the huge number of missiles that were launched against Paulus’s army surrounded at Stalingrad. The launchers used there were of two types: some were strongly reminiscent of Congreve launchers - wide stepladders installed directly on the ground, others were mounted on vehicles. A very original Russian system was a box-like trigger device that the Germans called the “Stalinist organ.” It consisted of 48 guides for launching 8.2 cm caliber rockets, which were launched at very short intervals, that is, practically in one gulp. Subsequently, the Russians organized mass production of 13.2 cm and 30 cm missiles, but information about them is kept in deep secrecy. In Japan, rocket development began in 1935, but was slow and uncertain. It was led by Lieutenant Commander Kumao Hino. The general impression that one gets from reading various Japanese departmental reports is that higher Japanese headquarters definitely did not want to interfere with the development of missiles, but they also did not show any interest in it. The allocations were small, and few material resources were provided. It is known, however, that the Japanese had some achievements. So, they created their own, very original solid rocket fuel, the weight composition of which is shown below. Potassium sulfate - intended to slow down the burning rate. By the time it became obvious that Japan was losing the war, someone learned that Japanese military warehouses were storing a huge amount of 250-kg high-explosive bombs for which there were not enough planes to deliver them. These bombs were converted into rockets by attaching a propellant rocket motor to the tail of the bomb. The shells were launched from inclined wooden or iron chutes and had a maximum flight range of 4800 m. Other aerial bombs and even artillery shells were “adapted” in a similar way (see Appendix II). Much research work in the field of combat missiles was carried out in England. Its general management was carried out by Alvin Crowe, head of the technical service of the Ministry of Supply. Much of what was done in this field during the war years was described by Albin Crowe in a lecture given on 21 November 1947 at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers; I received a printed copy of this lecture from the English Interplanetary Society, and I will allow myself to quote here some excerpts from it. “Reports,” said Crowe, “received by the British government in 1934 about German work in the field of missiles forced the War Department to seriously think about the need to develop missiles in England. The first meeting to discuss the matter was called in December 1934, and in April 1935 the research department of the Woolwich Arsenal was asked to draw up a program of work." It was decided that first of all it was necessary to try to create an anti-aircraft missile equivalent in power to a projectile from an English three-inch anti-aircraft gun. This led to the development of a 5 cm anti-aircraft missile, prototypes of which were soon manufactured and tested. “The results of the first experiments in the spring and summer of 1937,” Crowe continued, “were encouraging; the rockets seemed quite reliable, but with the onset of the cold winter of 1937/38, it became obvious that the quality of the plastic combustion chamber created for this type of rocket was unsatisfactory. About a year after the development of the 5-cm missile, the need arose to create an even larger and more powerful missile with characteristics approaching those of the new 94-mm anti-aircraft gun, which was about to enter service... In this regard, the development of the 76-mm began urgently mm rocket, which was completed by the fall of 1938, and the following spring was already subjected to ground tests. During the winter of 1938/39, approximately 2,500 launches were carried out in Jamaica under the ballistic missile test program. The results turned out to be unacceptable to the Imperial General Staff, since the characteristics were lower than required, and the new missile was seriously inferior in firing accuracy to a 94-mm anti-aircraft gun. Nevertheless, the development of this missile in order to improve its accuracy continued until the start of the war.” Four months after the start of the war, it was decided that even such a weapon, which does not have sufficient shooting accuracy, would still find use, and therefore the order was given to put the 76-mm rocket into production. By that time, a launcher for this missile had also been created. During 1940-1941, several thousand such installations were manufactured, intended for the defense of the most important facilities - the largest military factories and railway supply points. In November 1941, a twin launcher was created based on the single model. Later, salvo launch systems appeared, providing batteries of 76-mm missiles with massive firing in salvoes of 128 missiles. An even later step was the development of a 127 mm rocket for ground forces; its manual stated that it could carry a warhead weighing 13.5 kg over a distance of 3 to 6 km. As already mentioned, the United States began research work in the field of combat missiles in 1940. Even though the Americans were working independently, they were familiar with British rocket models, so they could easily avoid any mistake made at Woolwich. The history of the development of American rocketry has already been told by people who are more knowledgeable in this matter, that is, by those who led and led this work. I will limit myself to only describing some technical issues and showing how they were solved by American engineers. Obviously, the invention of a high-quality powder rocket charge did not solve the whole problem; it was necessary to ensure that, when used as a propulsion system, the rocket would be provided with uniform thrust, and this was precisely what could not be achieved in a rocket using ordinary black powder. In such a rocket, the thrust almost suddenly and very quickly increases to a certain value, say up to 7 kg, and remains at this level for a quarter of a second or so, then drops just as quickly, perhaps to 0.5 kg, and remains at this level for for another 1-2 seconds. The designers wanted to get a rocket that would quickly develop a certain thrust, maintain it for some time and then stop working. The thrust-versus-time curve of such a rocket would be similar to the profile of a long, flat building with sloping walls (the so-called flat-top curve). Such a thrust curve can only be obtained if the exhaust gases of the rocket engine are constant in terms of both exhaust velocity and volume (mass) throughout its operation. Therefore, it was necessary to obtain a stick of gunpowder that would burn evenly. To understand what's going on here, imagine that your gunpowder is shaped like a ball and burns only on the surface. As this ball burns, its surface becomes smaller and smaller. Therefore, the amount of gas generated also decreases, and the thrust curve goes down. This problem is further complicated by the fact that combustion occurs in a closed space with only one outlet - the nozzle, and therefore any increase in pressure in the combustion chamber leads to a change in the combustion rate of the rocket charge. One of the most commonly used solutions to this problem is to shape the rocket charge into a thick-walled tube that burns both “inward” (reducing the burning surface) and “inward” (increasing the burning surface). Thus, both processes must equalize the amount of gases released throughout the combustion process. But such combustion cannot be achieved in a powder rocket charge, which fits tightly to the walls of the rocket; it must be kept in a “suspended” state (Fig. 30). Rice. 30. Solid fuel rockets. At the top is a rocket with an armored powder bomb; below is a rocket with a powder bomb burning over the entire surface In England, this was understood at the very beginning of work on powder engines. The British called such a charge “free”. Researchers in America decided in their own way and called a similar charge “a bomb with combustion over the entire surface.” To better understand the essence of the issue, let us dwell on the concepts of “checker”, “wall thickness” and “lattice”. A powder block is a piece of a powder charge of any shape and size. Now there are checkers 1 m long and weighing up to 500 g for every inch of their length (200 g/cm). Every checker has a certain diameter, but it is not its main characteristic; Since checkers are usually made hollow, the thickness of their walls is no less important than the diameter. The wall thickness of a tubular block is taken to be its maximum thickness. A lattice is a device that holds a checker in a certain position. An excellent example in terms of simplicity of design and characteristics is the modern aviation 127 mm solid fuel rocket, known as the “Holi Moses”. In Fig. 31 shows the three main parts of this missile: the warhead, the rocket part (rocket engine) and the tail part with a stabilizer. Rice. 31. 127-mm aircraft rocket "Holy Moses" The powder block in this rocket has a cross-section with very thick walls, which makes it very convenient for mass production. This cross-sectional shape of the checker ensures even combustion with a slight deviation in the amount of gases formed. To obtain the required burning rate, some areas of the checker can be armored with plastic strips that limit combustion. In very long checkers, it is advisable to armor only that part of the checker that is closest to the nozzle. This is to ensure that too many gases do not build up near the nozzle, which could block the gases released at the front of the engine and thus rupture the engine. For some time, researchers have been struggling to solve a very interesting problem. It is known that checkers made from double-base gunpowder are not always flawless. They may, for example, have internal voids, which lead to the same negative consequences as cracks in black grain checkers. It was not easy to detect such voids, especially since the substance used to stabilize the combustion caused the powder charge to darken as it aged. Therefore, the message that checkers can be made translucent using urea was greeted with great joy. These checkers were easier to check, but in tests it turned out that every second charge ruptured the engine. Dark checkers, which may have had large voids and defects, resulted in fewer explosions than translucent ones. Close examination revealed that some unknown process was occurring when the translucent block burned, which was called "termite cracking" because the partially burned blocks looked as if they had been eaten away by termites. We had to conduct a whole series of studies to establish what was happening in these checkers. It turned out that when the saber burned, not only thermal energy was released, but also light energy, which, penetrating in the form of rays inside the transparent saber, was absorbed by microscopic particles of dust embedded in the gunpowder. By absorbing the rays, these particles heated to such an extent that they ignited the gunpowder located next to them. As a result, local combustion centers were formed, which led to the characteristic “cracking” of gunpowder, accompanied by explosions. It is due to these circumstances that currently all checkers are black. After the problems of the size of the bomb, the thickness of its walls, the diameter of the nozzle and other issues related to the engine were solved, another problem arose, the problem of stabilizing the rocket in flight. Previous practice has shown that a rocket can be stabilized in two ways. One path was suggested by an ancient arrow, the other, more modern, by a rifle bullet. When applied to rockets, these methods can be called aerodynamic stabilization and rotational stabilization, respectively. Aerodynamic stabilization requires the creation of special devices - stabilizers in the tail of the rocket and depends on the speed of the rocket in the active part of the trajectory. Rotational stabilization of rockets, pioneered by Gale in the 19th century, can be independent of the rocket's speed if the energy of the escaping gases is used to create the torque. The latter is achieved by one of two methods: using “gas rudders” in the flow of escaping gases or creating several nozzles located around the circumference of the rocket chamber with a slight inclination (the Germans used this method in the Nebelwerfer projectile). The second method is the best, since “gas rudders” lead to a loss of engine power. The study of the influence of the amount of rotational motion on the accuracy of a rocket's flight was carried out by the department of the US National Defense Research Committee, which was in charge of the development of rocket artillery weapons. The research method was proposed by R. Mallin, who at that time was busy designing rockets for Bell Telephone Laboratories. His idea was to launch a rocket without any stabilizers from a rotating launch tube. This made it possible to test the same rocket at different torques. The proposal was immediately accepted and a special launcher was built, consisting of a launch tube mounted on large ball bearings placed in a stationary tube. The entire installation had vertical and horizontal aiming mechanisms, like a conventional gun. The rotation of the internal launch tube was ensured by an electric motor with a power of 1.5 liters. With.; it could rotate at speeds of 800, 1400 and 2400 rpm. As a result of experiments, it was found that even at a moderate rotation speed, a significant reduction in missile dispersion is achieved and that the rotation speed is not a critical factor in stability. The dispersion of non-rotating standard missiles was 0-39 of the inclinometer, that is, at a distance of 1000 m such a missile deflected by 39 m, and when firing missiles rotating at speeds of 800, 1400 and 2400 rpm, the dispersion decreased respectively to 0-13, 0- 11 and 0-9 protractor divisions. To study the effect of rotational motion on other rockets that had a very large dispersion, 25 such launches were carried out at a launch tube rotation speed of about 2400 rpm. The dispersion was 0-13 protractor. When the same missiles were fired from a 3.3 m long non-rotating launch tube, the dispersion increased to 0-78 However, only a few American spin missiles were used on the battlefield (see Appendix II). Most of the American missiles during the Second World War were stabilized with the help of aerodynamic stabilizers. A very common one among these missiles was the Bazooka rocket-propelled anti-tank gun. The first Bazooka missiles had significant design flaws. There were frequent barrel bursts when shooting on hot days, but after the charge was reduced, it worked well in hot and warm weather, and still failed on cold days. When a charge was finally developed that worked well at all temperatures, complaints arose that the launch tube was too long and inconvenient for use in forests and rough terrain. But the launch tube had to be long, since it was necessary that the entire powder charge burned before the rocket left the tube, otherwise the rocket engine torch could burn the gunner’s face. This particular problem was later solved very simply, by creating a folding launch tube. The Bazooka was first used on the battlefield in North Africa. When, in early 1943, Major General L. Campbell announced the existence of this weapon among the Allies and explained that a small rocket weighing only a few kilograms could destroy a tank, many thought that its effectiveness was due to the high speed of the rocket projectile. In reality, the Bazooka missile moves very slowly; it can be seen along the entire trajectory from the launch tube to the target. The secret of its high penetration power had nothing to do with the fact that the Bazooka was equipped with a rocket engine; it was hidden in the pointed warhead of the rocket, where the shaped charge was placed. This charge was invented by American explosives specialist Professor Charles Munro. In 1887, while experimenting with explosives, Munro noticed a completely new and astonishing phenomenon. One of the explosives he tested was a disk of pyroxylin with letters and numbers carved into it—“USN 1884,” indicating the place and time of its manufacture. Munro detonated this disk of pyroxylin next to a heavy armored plate. As he expected, the damage to the armor plate was minor, but the letters and numbers "USN 1884" were carved into the metal! Nothing like this has ever been observed. This strange phenomenon could only be explained by the fact that the explosive charge did not adhere tightly to the metal in the places where the letters and numbers were cut out. Munro concluded that the combination of a small air space and the tight metal explosive around the air space was likely responsible for this phenomenon. To test his guess, he took a bunch of dynamite sticks and tied them tightly together, and pulled several central sticks inward by 2 cm. The resulting charge easily punched a hole in the thick wall of a bank safe. In 1888, Professor Munro wrote several articles about his discovery, and since then this phenomenon has been called the “Munro effect,” which was explained by the focusing effect of the charge explosion products. When observed from the outside, the explosion of a shaped charge is similar to the explosion of any other charge: the energy of the explosion spreads evenly in all directions, but inside the air cavity, the gases released by the explosion are focused, that is, collected into a narrow jet with great penetrating force (Fig. 32). Rice. 32. Munro shaped charge of the American M9A1 grenade (arrows indicate the direction of the explosion) Military research on shaped charges did not begin until World War II, when the metal lining of the shaped charge funnel was created. If the Munro effect manifested itself as the action of a high-intensity jet of hot gases ejected in one direction, then it was quite clear that the penetrating power of this jet could be increased if its mass was somehow increased. It was assumed that the layer of metal covering the funnel would be torn by the explosion into small fragments, which would increase the mass of gases. Soon this assumption was confirmed experimentally, and zinc and steel were recognized as the most effective funnel lining materials. The Munro effect depends not only on the presence of a cavity in the explosive and the metal lining, but also on the distance between the charge and the target at the moment of explosion. This distance should be equal to several centimeters. For this reason, a shaped charge at high collision speeds becomes ineffective, since it takes some time for the fuse to operate and the charge to explode. The Bazooka rocket was quite suitable in speed for a shaped charge. Another American missile equipped with a shaped charge, not counting the improved versions of the same Bazooka missile, was the Ram missile, hastily developed for the Korean War. Heavier American missiles during the Second World War did not have shaped charges, since they were intended to fight not against tanks, but against enemy personnel. This includes missiles with a caliber of 114 mm and 183 mm. The first weighed about 17 kg, had almost the same destructive power as a 105 mm howitzer shell, and was operated by one person. It was produced together with a packaging tube, which also served as a launcher. A tripod was attached to the pipe, similar to a camera tripod. The entire system weighed about 23 kg. Missiles with a caliber of 114 mm and 183 mm were mounted on installations on the decks of special missile-carrying ships; while fire control was carried out from a safe shelter below deck. One missile-carrying ship could, within a few minutes, eject as much steel and explosives as the gun turrets of three battleships. The massive use of missiles made possible successful breakthroughs of coastal defenses and amphibious landings. Thus, the invasion of Southern France was carried out after the massive use of up to 40,000 missiles. To support ground forces, special “rocket” tanks were created. On the turret of the Sherman M-4 tank, 60 launch tubes for 114 mm missiles were installed in four tiers. This installation was called “Calliope”; it rotated along with the tank’s turret. The hinged rod connecting the installation with the 75-mm turret gun allowed for vertical aiming using the gun's vertical aiming mechanism. An electric launch device developed by Western Electric made it possible to launch rockets at very short intervals. The secret device throughout the war was the M-10 anti-submarine missile launcher, known as the Hedgehog. It was developed in England, but later transferred to the USA, where Navy specialists significantly improved it. The installation had 24 heavy rockets that were launched within 2.5 seconds. The missiles fell in the area of the supposed location of the enemy submarine and sank into the water with their warhead down. The charges of these missiles were not ordinary depth charges; they exploded only upon meeting the target, and not upon reaching a certain depth. Therefore, the sound of an underwater explosion was an indication that the submarine had been hit. However, the largest American missile of the Second World War was the Tiny Team aircraft missile, designed to hit targets located beyond the reach of conventional artillery. Outwardly, it resembled an aviation naval torpedo and had a length of 3 m and a diameter of 30 cm; in the starting position she weighed 580 kg. The powder rocket charge consisted of four cross-shaped checkers with a total weight of up to 66 kg. The warhead of the Tiny Team missile weighed 268 kg and carried about 68 kg of TNT. The first experimental launches of the Tiny Team rocket from an aircraft were carried out using a device extending from the bomb bay; when launched from fighter aircraft, the rocket was released on a lanyard. During one of the first tests, at the end of August 1944, an accident occurred. Immediately after the launch of the Tiny Team rocket, the plane from which the launch was made went into a dive and crashed. The pilot, Lieutenant Armitage, after whom the airfield at the missile test station in Inyokern (California) was named, also died. An investigation into the cause of the crash showed that the aircraft's tail was severely damaged by the rocket charge igniter. It was proposed to significantly reduce the power of the igniter, as well as increase the length of the cord. Since then, rocket launches have not been accompanied by accidents. During World War II, the Tiny Team missile was used against the Japanese on the island of Okinawa. But it was not possible to establish the effectiveness of missile bombing then, because the missiles were used in combination with many other weapons. The development of anti-aircraft missiles also began at this time. These rockets are different in that they require a booster to provide as much initial momentum as possible upon launch. Naturally, this is achieved by maximizing the accelerator charge. Initially, anti-aircraft guided missiles were given the shape and appearance of a jet aircraft. But, in order to launch these projectiles and put them on the trajectory, a powerful rocket accelerator or an expensive and overly bulky catapult was needed. Unfortunately, the launch rockets manufactured at that time were relatively small and low-power. To ensure the take-off of a fighter aircraft, two to four such missiles were required, and to take off a heavy bomber, several dozen such missiles were needed. Therefore, not only the creators of guided anti-aircraft missiles, but also aviation industrial firms took up the development of heavy, powerful boosters. Chemists and fuel specialists, of course, were well aware of all the capabilities of the then known accelerator fuels. Their main problem in this matter was not so much the search for the actual combustible substance, that is, the substance to be burned, as the selection of an oxidizing agent - a substance that provides the oxygen necessary for combustion. All solid oxidizing agents known at that time were divided into two groups, each of which contained a large number of substances that differed in their advantages and disadvantages. The first group included nitrates, of which potassium nitrate (KMO 3) was best known in pyrotechnic practice. Almost 40% of its weight is oxygen released during combustion. However, the combustion products with this oxidizer consist mainly of smoke, which creates great difficulties when working with it. Next in this group was sodium nitrate (NaNO 3), which releases even more oxygen (about 47%), but also produces a lot of smoke and, in addition, has a number of other disadvantages. The third oxidizing agent, ammonium nitrate (NH 4 NO 3), does not form any solid products during combustion, but releases only 20% oxygen, since part of the oxygen goes to combine with hydrogen of the same molecule. In addition, with a large increase in temperature (above 32° C), the volume of ammonium nitrate changes greatly, which seems unsafe. The second group included perchlorates. At first glance, these substances seem to be more effective than nitrates, since they release on average more than 50% (by weight) oxygen. Thus, magnesium perchlorate (MgCl0 4) releases 57.2% oxygen. But chemists rejected this substance because of its extremely high hygroscopicity. The next largest amount of oxygen released (52%) is sodium perchlorate (NaCl0 4), also a very hygroscopic compound, which, when burned, releases a solid substance - table salt. Another oxidizing agent of this group, potassium perchlorate (KClO 4), gives almost 46% oxygen, but just like sodium perchlorate, it forms a solid residue - potassium chloride (KCl). The last one in the group is ammonium perchlorate (NH 4 Cl0 4); it releases up to 34% oxygen, does not change volume like ammonium nitrate, and does not emit any solids with combustion products. But one of the combustion products of ammonium perchlorate is hydrogen chloride (HCl) - an extremely toxic and very active substance that forms fog in damp air. Of all the oxidizers listed, only potassium perchlorate can be used in a rocket engine, and it was actually used as a propellant component by the Guggenheim Aeronautical Laboratory of the California Institute of Technology (GALCIT for short). However, we forgot about another group of chemicals with high oxidizing properties - the so-called picrates, which are based on picric acid. This acid can serve as an explosive and is also quite toxic. Its full name is trinitrophenol (HO C 6 H 2 (N0 2) 3). Chemists classify it as a typical nitro-compound of the aromatic series, and the military calls it lyddite or melinite. Very pure picric acid itself is quite safe, but it easily forms certain salts when reacting with metals - picrates, which are extremely sensitive to friction or heat. Picrates of heavy metals, especially those such as lead, detonate at the slightest shock. Light metal picrates are easier to handle; Picrate gunpowders such as Brugere gunpowder and Designolles gunpowder have long been known, which were used both for civilian blasting and for military purposes. Brugere's gunpowder consisted of 54% ammonium picrate, 45% potassium nitrate and 1% inert substances. Designolles' gunpowder included potassium picrate, potassium nitrate and charcoal. Currently, a propellant rocket mixture is used, closely resembling Brugere gunpowder, which consists of ammonium picrate (40-70%), potassium nitrate (20-50%) and a solid additive. However, despite the certain promise of picrate gunpowder, Nobel’s old dibasic gunpowders have become more commonly used, which are now produced not in the form of pressed bombs, but in the form of cast powder charges. Pressed Nobel checkers usually included 50-60% nitrocellulose, 30-45% nitroglycerin and 1-10% other substances, while cast charges, along with nitrocellulose (45-55%) and nitroglycerin (25-40%), contain up to 12 more -22% plasticizer and about 1-2% various special additives. Replacing pressing with casting made it possible to create charges more than 30 cm thick and over 180 cm long, releasing all the energy contained in them within 2.5-3 seconds and thereby creating a huge initial impulse. Large cast powder charges are surrounded by a layer of plastic that fits tightly to the walls of the rocket motor housing. One of these large accelerators is shown in section in Fig. 33. In this example, the front plate presses on the charge using a powerful spring. This allows you to fix the position of the charge and have a small space to compensate for the thermal expansion of the charge at the beginning of combustion. The charge ignites from the front, and combustion develops from the central channel to the periphery of the charge. By giving the central channel a certain shape, it is possible to regulate the internal pressure. The cross-shaped block discussed above, for example, burns in such a way that the internal pressure is maximum at the moment of ignition of the charge, while at the same time the thick-walled tubular block theoretically ensures constant pressure in the combustion chamber during the entire period of engine operation; such combustion is called combustion with constant thrust. If the pressure in the combustion chamber rises from the moment of ignition and increases until the entire charge is burned out, combustion with increasing thrust takes place, as they say. Such combustion is most typical for a checker made in the form of a rod with several longitudinal channels; it is less typical for such blocks that fit tightly to the walls of the engine housing and have only one central channel. If the latter is not round, but star-shaped, an interesting phenomenon occurs: the charge burns with a slight increase in thrust during the first quarter of a second, then, for 2 seconds, burns with a drop in thrust, after which the thrust increases again. In addition, the star-shaped cross-section of the central channel places very low demands on the strength of the housing and thus makes it possible to reduce its weight. Rice. 33. Solid fuel accelerator Such boosters are used to launch large guided missiles, such as Matador missiles. There were also several attempts to use them on experimental manned fighter aircraft. In addition, they tried to place rocket boosters on special rocket sleds and carts to test the effect of large accelerations and decelerations on the human body. Similar boosters were tested on anti-aircraft missiles, which led to the creation of a completely new type of research missile, which is discussed in subsequent chapters of the book. And finally, these heavy cast charges made it possible to create new surface-to-surface missiles capable of carrying a heavy warhead, including an atomic one, at a distance corresponding to the firing range of the longest-range artillery. Rice. 34. The Onest John rocket and its flight trajectories The rocket I have in mind is called Onest John (Fig. 34). This thoroughly tested and completely reliable system, officially called the M-31 artillery rocket, has a XM-289 type launcher with an elevation angle of about 45°. The Onest John's appearance resembles a huge Bazooka missile, mainly due to its massive, pointed warhead. On October 4, 1956, during a display at the Aberdeen Proving Ground, one of the Onest John missiles covered a distance of 20,800 m, and the second traveled 20,600 m. A characteristic feature of the Onest John missile is that it does not have any guidance system; aiming is carried out, like an artillery gun, by changing the elevation angle of the launcher. Since all gunpowders burn at different rates, largely dependent on the ambient temperature, the results of unguided rocket launches are not exactly the same. In order to somehow reduce the temperature influence of the surrounding air, the Onest John rocket is equipped with special thermoelectric blankets. In low temperature conditions, these blankets maintain the optimal temperature of the powder charge. Currently, a smaller version of the Onest John missile has been created - the so-called Little John XM-47. This rocket has a caliber of 318 mm. An ancient Greek measure of length, varying depending on the terrain within 150-190 m. (Editor's note) The full title of this book is: “The Star Messenger, announcing great and wonderful sights and bringing them to the attention of philosophers and astronomers, which were observed by Galileo Galilei with the help of his recently invented telescope on the face of the Moon, in countless fixed stars, in the Milky Way , in the nebulous stars, especially when observing four planets revolving around Jupiter at different periods of time with amazing speed, planets that until recently were unknown to anyone and which the author was the first to discover recently and decided to call the Medicean luminaries.” - (Author's note) See Eberhardt O, Freier Fall, Wurf und SchuB, Berlin, 1928. Lehmano E, A. Zeppelin, Longmans Green. New York, 1937, p. 103-104. In domestic industry and literature, this substance is known as “centralite”. (Editor's note) Later it was found that one can easily get rid of this factor. The rocket fuels division of Philipps Petroleum has developed a solid booster fuel consisting of carbon black, synthetic rubber and some additives with ammonium nitrate as an oxidizing agent. This fuel is very resistant to large temperature fluctuations, but emits a small amount of smoke when burned. (Author's note) This fuel consisted of 70-78% KClO 4 and 22-30% asphalt with a small addition of asphalt oil. (Author's note).
Together with Indonesia
Realities and prospects
Basic data of the ARKK "Air Launch" launch vehicle Rocket length, m 36
Diameter of 1st and 2nd stages, m 2,66
Head fairing diameter, m 2,7
Landed mass, t 103
Launch weight, t 102,3
Mass of the launched payload, kg:
- to the reference polar orbit H=200 km 3000
- to geotransfer orbit 1600
- to geostationary orbit 800
Release time to GS0 (h 7
Propulsion system:
- 1st stage NK-43M
- 2nd stage RD-0124
- upper stage (URB) RD-0158
(RD-0161)
Notes:
Loading...
