Yf-12s As Raf Strategic Bombers

[Mossie]

I've been thinking along those lines too, but with a modified Blue Steel.  The Blue Steel Mk.2 would have had two booster rockets & four ramjets in addition to the rocket motor.  Give it a larger wing maybe.  Blue Steel Mk.2 would have been Mach 3+ with 700-800 miles range.  Delete the warhead & you should be able to carry a payload too.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Okay, just looked it up, the Skybolt and D-21 are the same sort of weight, the D-21 is a little longer, but this wouldn't be a show-stopper. The main problems are the wingspan and height, since the D-21 (unlike the Skybolt) has wings and a tail. If these could be folded - even if only the tail could fold, the wings could be kept as is. Obviously a B-52 is the easiest integration path, since that is what happen, but a D-21 tail-folder and Vulcan/Victor combo would be possible.

Basically, it is not 100% as good as a Skybolt, but would be a possibility, given the Skybolt's cancellation. Also, the Blue Steel had a 4m wingspan, so the 5.8m of the D-21 might still work, even if it necessitates carriage in the bomb bay.


All in all, it should be possible, and would yield a high-speed recon and strike platform. I still feel, despite the range advantage, that new tankers are a good idea though, if nothing else then to allow the aircraft to launch from over the pole (launching toward Moscow, but effectively coming at Moscow from the East, from behind the defences). It is certainly attractive, and probably affordable.

Another possibility would of course be to use a 'cluster nuke' warhead, for city strikes, carrying multiple nuclear warheads, probably based on the nuclear artillery shells. They could then disperse once over the target, all simultaneously airbursting - allowing them all to detonate over a wide area. A single D-21 might carry as many as ten such warheads, each with a yield of up to 10kt. This would have the advantage of allowing an entire military complex to be destroyed with a single missile.

The only problem with your proposed ASM version of the D-21 drone is the payload.  The actual vehicle had a very limited space since the majority of the airframe was taken up by the Ram Jet Engine, followed by Fuel, and the remaining space available was left for the guidance system and the camera/film package under the forward fuselage.  Your multiple warhead idea would not get far if you sacrifice fuel for payload.  

The possibility of using the D-21 as a missile type weapon is still viable but it would be restricted to a single warhead to engage a single target.  As far as the payload goes, you would have enough room for one physics package and the rest of the space would be used for the weapon safing/arming system and the necessary permissive action link to provide the authority to use the weapon.  The remaining available space would be taken up by the missile guidance equipment.  

Even if you armed the D-21 with a conventional high explosive warhead and an inertial guidance package or ARM seeker, it would still be a threat to the opposition as it would have the destructive power of the high explosive coupled with the kinetic energy transfer of the airframe mass which would be significant due to the extremely high speed achieved by this vehicle.  This was something that was factored into the BQM-34 Firebee drones that were modified for limited use aboard U.S. Navy Destroyers prior to the AGM-84 Harpoon becoming operational with the fleet.  These "AGM-34" Firebee Anti-Ship Missile weapons were intended to home in and impact with the target vessel without any high explosive warhead and instead relied upon the kinetic energy transfer at impact and any remaining unspent fuel to create a conflagration and achieve a kill.  Shipboard fires are bad news and if your Naval service is not up to speed on damage control, your ship will be on the way to the bottom before you know it.  This was something that the Navy was counting on if they had to go toe to toe with the USSR.  After the AGM-84 Harpoon was fielded, the Firebee drone weapon was retired without much ceremony to become a side note in the development history of the anti-ship missile.    

I like the idea of adapting the Vulcan to carry the D-21 as this would be a very interesting combination, especially if you paint the Vulcan in a red, white, and blue test scheme with a D-21 done up in suitable test vehicle colors.  If you were to do an operational aircraft with the D-21 attached to the underside of the aircraft, would you consider using the former Skybolt pylons for carriage of countermeasures such as the types that were fitted to RAF Tornados? I think that would look much more presentable instead of the US ALQ pods as it would imply that the RAF ECM equipment was on par with their American equivalents.  

In regards to the Skybolt, it was a great idea and prior to cancellation it did demonstrate that it was capable of performing the mission.  The SRAM however, was an even better idea as it provided all of the capabilities of the Skybolt in a much smaller package and allowed the carrier aricraft to haul up to 20 X SRAM instead of 4 X Skybolt (referring to the B-52 here) which was a force multiplier in its own right.  If the USAF had been smart, they could have fitted the B-58 with the SRAM as well as fielding a tactcial version of it for use on the F-4E/G and F-111E/F (this is tactical not strategic, I know it was used on the FB-111A).  This would have allowed for a much larger inventory of this weapon and its use as a tactical weapon may have seen the eventual modification of the SRAM to become a very long range ARM for attacking tactical and strategic radar targets (originally proposed by Boeing and rejected by the USAF).

[Archibald]

What about a thing roughly similar to the first FISH proposal, Ie a 3-stage vehicle ?

I mean, a Vulcan carrying a Blue Steel mated to a D-21... the blue steel beeing ysed as a booster for the d-21... (too much caffein this prning)  

[Shasper]

Jeffry, the only difference between the SRAM and the Skybolt is range, the Skybolt was to be an Air-launched IRBM of sorts (the ultimate stand-off weapon) with a range of at least 1200mi or greater, verses the 100mi ish range of the SRAM.


Shas B)

[Archibald]

Sometimes I just feel silly... got an YF-12 in the stash for month, and an unemployed Blue Steel, too. I've just thought while reading this thread that  I could fit the former to the latter ...     , and painting the
YF-12 in anti*flash livery...

[elmayerle]

Jeffry, the only difference between the SRAM and the Skybolt is range, the Skybolt was to be an Air-launched IRBM of sorts (the ultimate stand-off weapon) with a range of at least 1200mi or greater, verses the 100mi ish range of the SRAM.

Well, size, too.  The Skybolt's rather longer than the SRAM.