U.S. Army eyeing 'nanomissile' launcher

"The U.S. Army says it has been developing
what would be the smallest U.S. launch vehicle,
a "nanomissile" to deploy swarms of tiny
satellites."

See:

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/US...ncher_999.html

) wrote:
"The U.S. Army says it has been developing what would be the smallest
U.S. launch vehicle, a "nanomissile" to deploy swarms of tiny satellites."
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/US...ncher_999.html

Finally, the gazillion-dollar defense contract Estes Rockets has been
dreaming of all these years.

--
djb@ | Dan Birchall - Observation System Associate - Subaru Telescope.
naoj | Views I express are my own, obviously not those of my employer.
..org | Our atmospheric inversion layer keeps silly people below 3000m.

On 8/12/2010 2:21 PM, wrote:
"The U.S. Army says it has been developing
what would be the smallest U.S. launch vehicle,
a "nanomissile" to deploy swarms of tiny
satellites."

See:

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/US...ncher_999.html

If it's supposed to launch satellites, why do they refer to it as a
"missile"?

Pat

On 8/12/2010 6:55 PM, Dan Birchall wrote:
) wrote:
"The U.S. Army says it has been developing what would be the smallest
U.S. launch vehicle, a "nanomissile" to deploy swarms of tiny satellites."
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/US...ncher_999.html

Finally, the gazillion-dollar defense contract Estes Rockets has been
dreaming of all these years.

I can't see something 12 feet tall going into orbit unless it has _a
lot_ of solid fuel boosters strapped onto it.
Are they maybe going to air launch it?

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote in
:

On 8/12/2010 2:21 PM, wrote:
"The U.S. Army says it has been developing
what would be the smallest U.S. launch vehicle,
a "nanomissile" to deploy swarms of tiny
satellites."

See:

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/US...sile_launcher_
999.html

If it's supposed to launch satellites, why do they refer to it as a
"missile"?

It will also launch sub-orbital payloads, including precision
guided bombs. I could see a 'recon rock', getting extremely
high-resolution images out of a very small package that would be
more difficult to track.

Apparently pressure-fed engines, since ethane and nitrous oxide
can be stored as room temperature liquids under pressure.
So it's a very simple and compact system; how small can an
orbital launcher get?

Move over, Elon; you've got competition from the low end.

--Damon

On 8/13/2010 12:36 AM, Damon Hill wrote:


Apparently pressure-fed engines, since ethane and nitrous oxide
can be stored as room temperature liquids under pressure.
So it's a very simple and compact system; how small can an
orbital launcher get?

Yeah, but neither that propulsion system or the solid boosters give you
very high specific impulse...unless they've come with sort of super
solid fuel recipe.

pat

Pat Flannery wrote:

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/US...ncher_999.html

If it's supposed to launch satellites, why do they refer to it as a
"missile"?

Perhaps by any other name the Army would be infringing on the
territory of another service?

rick jones
--
The glass is neither half-empty nor half-full. The glass has a leak.
The real question is "Can it be patched?"
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway...
feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH...

Pat Flannery wrote in
dakotatelephone:

On 8/13/2010 12:36 AM, Damon Hill wrote:


Apparently pressure-fed engines, since ethane and nitrous oxide
can be stored as room temperature liquids under pressure.
So it's a very simple and compact system; how small can an
orbital launcher get?

Yeah, but neither that propulsion system or the solid boosters give you
very high specific impulse...unless they've come with sort of super
solid fuel recipe.

Apparently it's enough; also, nitrous decomposes exothermically (and
can detonate, as tragically demonstrated a couple of years ago), so
it's not exactly wimpy. I'd have thought hydrogen peroxide would be
better, but it'd require a separate pressurization system.

And ethane is C2H6; plenty of hydrogen molecules left over, which
lowers molecular weight of the exhaust and increases specific
impulse--provided there's plenty of heat.

From what I red, the solid rocket boosters are stock components
using typical propellants.

--Damon, playing at rocket science

On 8/13/2010 2:39 PM, Damon Hill wrote:
Pat wrote in
dakotatelephone:

On 8/13/2010 12:36 AM, Damon Hill wrote:


Apparently pressure-fed engines, since ethane and nitrous oxide
can be stored as room temperature liquids under pressure.
So it's a very simple and compact system; how small can an
orbital launcher get?

Yeah, but neither that propulsion system or the solid boosters give you
very high specific impulse...unless they've come with sort of super
solid fuel recipe.

Apparently it's enough; also, nitrous decomposes exothermically (and
can detonate, as tragically demonstrated a couple of years ago), so
it's not exactly wimpy. I'd have thought hydrogen peroxide would be
better, but it'd require a separate pressurization system.

And ethane is C2H6; plenty of hydrogen molecules left over, which
lowers molecular weight of the exhaust and increases specific
impulse--provided there's plenty of heat.

From what I red, the solid rocket boosters are stock components
using typical propellants.

--Damon, playing at rocket science

I'll say this for them; if they can actually get something 12 feet tall
to put a usable payload weight into orbit, my hat's off to them -
particularly if it's surface launched.
Of course two spin-offs of this could be a tiny mobile ICBM, as well as
a tiny mobile direct-ascent ASAT.
That last job actually might fall under the Army's purview, as it could
be considered a high altitude air defense missile.
Nike Zeus/Nike-X/Spartan ABMs could be used for ASAT work, and they were
operated by the Army.

Pat

Pat Flannery writes:

I'll say this for them; if they can actually get something 12 feet tall
to put a usable payload weight into orbit, my hat's off to them -
particularly if it's surface launched.

Nature is betting against it. If you can get above most of the
atmosphere before launching (air launch) it may be doable. It even may
be useful.


Jochem

--
"A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take away."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery