Manned BOMARC

[maxmwill]

I realize that in another thread I'd discussed the possibility of a manned BOMARC, having seen a photo of a mockup(sadly, now lost), but, I'd like to try to resurrect that idea.

What if the Air Force had proposed a manned BOMARC, in response to the feared fleets of Soviet bombers, each one intent on vaporizing a US city, and that the state of the art of missile interception(intercepting high altitude high speed bombers) was considered woefully inefficient enough.

Now, I'm sure that by that time, the problem of a piloted rocket interceptor, as illustrated by the Bachem Natter, was understood, and sufficient safety measures for the pilot were instituted, so, why not?

Would a manned BOMARC been a possibility?

And yes, I realize that the fuselage would have had to have been widened and strengthened.

But, why not?

[jcf]

By the time you got done redesigning it to carry a pilot, a weapons load, adding ability to maneuver etc., it would
no longer be a BOMARC. 

If however you mean a rocket-boosted, ramjet-powered point-defense interceptor that kinda looks like a BOMARC,
well sure. 

I have the old Aurora 1/48 kit assembled and it really is very slender when compared to an aircraft in the same scale.
A Hunter appears massive next to the BOMARC.

[sandiego89]

I love the idea and have thought about it myself (plus manned Regulus, Matador and Mace).  I really want to do a manned 1/32 Mace from my Terracruiser....

Some other things that need to be worked out:

1) armament- assuming you are not going to go with a suicidal nuclear warhead, I suggest a missile(s) - Falcons or Genie would fit the period. Perhaps folding fin 2.75 inch rockets.  Alternate would be the pilot puts it on autopilot and punches out shorty before impact.  Finds a nice Eskimo woman and settles down.  

2) Recovery.  Not designed with a engine suitable for a return flight.  Ram jet would not work a slower approach speeds. Not designed with landing gear.   Would have too high landing speeds and atrocious approach characteristics with such a small wing.  A cruise return jet engine could be a possibility but it and landing gear would cut down significantly on payload and fuel.  I suggest a Natter type concept is most plausible. Pilot returns over friendly territory and the front part detaches and returns the pilot to ground in a return capsule on a parachute, the missile has it's own chute and is recovered somehow.  

Go for it- would love to see it.  

[Captain Canada]

Cool idea. Go for it ! Belcher Bits do a nice Bomarc and a launcher

http://www.belcherbits.com/lines/172conv/bl11.htm

[maxmwill]

Well, as to crew recovery(no matter how many a bird carries, be it one or more, they are always referred to as crew), that's be more a capsule, kinda like what the B58 carried, only a bit simpler with a chute to slow it down(a spike, similar to what the X7 had, would be interesting, if impractical).

That said, this could either be a rammer(ala P79), or even a one-way suicide flight, which would, on its face be silly, so something like several Genies(one or two under each wing, outboard of the engines, and possibly one hanging on the belly), or even masses of long range versions of the HVARs.

And yes, I do have something in mind, as I found the 1/47 scale Revell Bomarc might be amenable(and hopefully affordable if I win the bidding on Evilbay), with the canopy and possibly the cockpit from an old F106 kit.

[Mossie]

Scalorama?  The 1/47 kit as 1/72 aircraft would bring it up to a similar size to the F-102 like in the below pic:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/my_public_domain_photos/4393802709/in/photostream/lightbox/

[Mossie]

I love the idea and have thought about it myself (plus manned Regulus, Matador and Mace).  I really want to do a manned 1/32 Mace from my Terracruiser....

Navaho would be good, you don't even have to add an undercarriage.

[PR19_Kit]

Navaho would be good, you don't even have to add an undercarriage.

Actually the Navaho didn't have any landing gear. But it's aerodynamic test-bed, the X-10, did, and it looks  almost as cool. (there, I've said it AGAIN!)

The Navaho itself was launched almost vertically, piggy-backed on a monster booster that was bigger than itself. As it was intended to destroy things it didn't need any gear.

I've got the Sharkit Navaho kit (thanks to Renax searching half of France for me  ) and it's AWESOME!



X-10




Navaho and booster

[maxmwill]

Of course, on the subject of manned missile which might've been planned to stem the "Soviet hordes", one that has yet to be touched on here is the Snark, which even in 1/48 scale, as what the Lindberg kit was, it was huge, and could have had more than ample room to house a cockpit, and possibly even rudimentary landing gear, such as a pair of skids with nose wheel(as the X15 had). And there are still plenty of those kits available to make it not much of a financial sacrifice.

And then there was the Hounddog............

And, just so's no one is gonna accuse me of being a American jingoist, what about the British and Blue Steel?

[PR19_Kit]

Of course, on the subject of manned missile which might've been planned to stem the "Soviet hordes", one that has yet to be touched on here is the Snark, which even in 1/48 scale, as what the Lindberg kit was, it was huge, and could have had more than ample room to house a cockpit, and possibly even rudimentary landing gear, such as a pair of skids with nose wheel(as the X15 had). And there are still plenty of those kits available to make it not much of a financial sacrifice.

It works in 'almost 1/72 scale' too. My 'Hawker P.1086' used the smaller scale Revell Snark as its basis, and used grafted on Hunter bits and much of an F-16 landing gear. (Plus longer wings of course..........  )

[Captain Canada]

Love that one Kit 

[Mossie]

Actually the Navaho didn't have any landing gear. But it's aerodynamic test-bed, the X-10, did, and it looks  almost as cool. (there, I've said it AGAIN!)

The Navaho itself was launched almost vertically, piggy-backed on a monster booster that was bigger than itself. As it was intended to destroy things it didn't need any gear.

Thanks Kit, for some reason I never really twigged that the X-10 and Navaho were different, although I did think it strange that a cruise-missile should have landing gear!

[Mossie]

And, just so's no one is gonna accuse me of being a American jingoist, what about the British and Blue Steel?

Avro Z.101.   A real project to create a research vehicle with similar goals to the X-15.  The designers quickly realised that due to British warheads being large and heavy, if you took it out of Blue Steel you'd have just enough room to stick a pilot in and associated controls and it could go faster due to extra rocket fuel.

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,34932.0/highlight,avro+z+101.html