NIKE ZEUS A . . .

Onebadhawk
Shop deals on ebay
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Ez2cDave

Ez2cDave

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 18, 2009
Messages
6,552
Reaction score
2,698
Location
Raleigh, NC Area
A discussion about NIKE ZEUS A started in another thread about a NIKE HERCULES . . .

https://www.rocketryforum.com/threads/nike-hercules-two-stage-by-rharshberger.144093

Please check it out to "catch up" to where we are now.

I have a "working theory" that I am researching . . .

I am theorizing that the Upper Stage of the NIKE ZEUS A might have been the "HERCULES" Upper Stage of the NIKE HERCULES, fitted with the larger fins of the NIKE ZEUS A, and placed atop the THIOKOL MX-135 Booster.

NIKE ZEUS A was very short-lived, before being replaced by the NIKE ZEUS B and, later, SPARTAN. During the "gap" in the program, the true purpose of NIKE ZEUS A might have been,essentially, a "Booster Test Vehicle" for the NIKE ZEUS B, to get it "active", until SPARTAN was fully-developed and ready to be deployed.

Thoughts ?

Dave F.
 
Last edited:
An easy trick for scaling this rocket up, is to print the file measure it, then using a scaling function on a graphics program scale the image to the actual size of your project and have a local office print shop print the image at 1:1 for you. My Nike Hercules was built using this method, the drawing was about 4'x6' and in black and white was less than $10. It easy to go to the drawing and take actual measurements, rather than multiplying each measurement by a scale factor.
 
rharshberger said:
An easy trick for scaling this rocket up, is to print the file measure it, then using a scaling function on a graphics program scale the image to the actual size of your project and have a local office print shop print the image at 1:1 for you. My Nike Hercules was built using this method, the drawing was about 4'x6' and in black and white was less than $10. It easy to go to the drawing and take actual measurements, rather than multiplying each measurement by a scale factor.
Click to expand...

Rich,

All of that would be MUCH easier if I was looking at doing a NIKE HERCULES . . .

ZERO dimensioned drawings ( that I have ever been able to find ) exist for the NIKE ZEUS A.

The only dimensions I have are an overall length of 44 ft, 3 in / 13.5 meters, a Total Fin Span of 9 ft, 9 in. / 2.98 meters ( presumably for the Booster ), and a "diameter" of either 2.98 ft or 3 ft ( presumably for the Booster ).

Also, every photo I have ever seen are shot at an oblique angle . . . Nothing at 90 degrees to the airframe.

Please, everyone is welcome to comment, post ideas, suggestions, post government blueprints ( LOL ), etc . !

Dave F.
 
missile-gap-689571d8-342a-4429-9577-c5ca4836635-resize-750.jpg
This appears to be the nose section of the Zeus A, however...
  1. The title of the article is talking about "production", which wouldn't have referred to the Zeus A.
  2. The title of the picture says "third stage" which wouldn't be correct for a Zeus A.
  3. It looks like they're loading it into a silo, which probably wasn't done with a Zeus A.
  4. Nevertheless it really, really looks like a Zeus A nose cone, not a B.
No, I don't have the article, but it might be online somewhere.
 
vcp said:
This appears to be the nose section of the Zeus A, however...
  1. The title of the article is talking about "production", which wouldn't have referred to the Zeus A.
  2. The title of the picture says "third stage" which wouldn't be correct for a Zeus A.
  3. It looks like they're loading it into a silo, which probably wasn't done with a Zeus A.
  4. Nevertheless it really, really looks like a Zeus A nose cone, not a B.
No, I don't have the article, but it might be online somewhere.
Click to expand...

Nice find, Gary !

That cover photo sure looks to be from a NIKE ZEUS A. The article shows all NIKE ZEUS B pics, though.

https://archive.org/details/missilesrockets8196unse/page/n209

Dave F.
 
I thought I'd seen M&R online somewhere. I'd remembered thumbing through much of it but unfortunately finding few photos that were useful. Too bad the scan of that Zeus article has a picture physically cut out of it though. The article is interesting - the acquisition radar is freekin' awesome - surrounded by a 65-foot RF shield fence so nobody nearby gets cooked. Also the wire-wrap tech and magnetic memory.
 
Here is a M&R issue from Feb 1960 that has The "A" version in it on page 53
Pdf file attached below
 

Attachments

  • Aviation_Week_1960-02-29.pdf
    3.3 MB · Views: 52
I've been meaning to go dig this out of the workshop ever since this thread started, finally got around to it this morning. This is a low power Zeus-ish rocket that I built back in 1998 or 99.

I didn't have any more luck finding data back then than we are having now, so I just eyeballed it. Even at that I didn't really try to be accurate at all, I just tried to make something that had the look. I named it Nike Zoos...:rolleyes:

It is a gap-staged two stager with a 24mm mount in the booster and an 18mm in the sustaner. The sustaner uses rear ejection. I have never flown it because, even though the design is sound, the combination of a few factors made me hesitant.

First was that the booster has no recovery device other than being (somewhat) light and rather draggy. With a spent D-12 case it is right on the edge of being unstable, so while likely, there is no guarantee that it would tumble. Even if it did tumble I think damage to the thing would be pretty likely.

The second concern was that it is gap staged. While not a big issue in and of itself, the thought of a rather heavy (and pointy!) sustainer coming in slick wasn't a good one....:eek:

The last concern was the limited space for the chute. This really isn't and issue, there is room for an adequate chute, but it sure won't be a parachute duration contender!

As you can imagine there is quite a bit of weight in the nose of the sustainer to assure stability. OR and Rocksim didn't exist when it was built, but when I get a little time I'm going to do an OR sim. If the sims look good I plan on flying it (if the RSO okays it), but it will definitely be a heads-up flight!

Here are some pics:
Zoos 1.jpg
Zoos 2.jpg

The booster is vented around the motor tube...
Zoos 3.jpg
Zoos 4.jpg
Zoos 5.jpg

Rear eject...
Zoos 6.jpg

I just like this angle...:cool:
Zoos 7.jpg
 
Mugs914 said:
I've been meaning to go dig this out of the workshop ever since this thread started, finally got around to it this morning. This is a low power Zeus-ish rocket that I built back in 1998 or 99.

I didn't have any more luck finding data back then than we are having now, so I just eyeballed it. Even at that I didn't really try to be accurate at all, I just tried to make something that had the look. I named it Nike Zoos...

It is a gap-staged two stager with a 24mm mount in the booster and an 18mm in the sustaner. The sustaner uses rear ejection. I have never flown it because, even though the design is sound, the combination of a few factors made me hesitant.

First was that the booster has no recovery device other than being (somewhat) light and rather draggy. With a spent D-12 case it is right on the edge of being unstable, so while likely, there is no guarantee that it would tumble. Even if it did tumble I think damage to the thing would be pretty likely.

The second concern was that it is gap staged. While not a big issue in and of itself, the thought of a rather heavy (and pointy!) sustainer coming in slick wasn't a good one....:eek:

The last concern was the limited space for the chute. This really isn't and issue, there is room for an adequate chute, but it sure won't be a parachute duration contender!

As you can imagine there is quite a bit of weight in the nose of the sustainer to assure stability. OR and Rocksim didn't exist when it was built, but when I get a little time I'm going to do an OR sim. If the sims look good I plan on flying it (if the RSO okays it), but it will definitely be a heads-up flight!
Click to expand...

Mugs.

Thank you for sharing your model . . . It gives me inspiration to make my project become a reality !

"Back in the day", I would have flown that using Mercury Switch staging . . . The Booster would have had a D12-3 and deployed a chute normally, after separation. The Upper Stage would have either been rear ejection. like your model, or deployed the nose cone, in conventional fashion.

Thanks again !

Dave F.

A.JPG


B.JPG



C.JPG


D.JPG


E.JPG


F.JPG


FLASHBULB IGNITION METHOD.jpg


G.JPG


H.JPG


I.JPG
 
Last edited:
Mugs914 said:
As you can imagine there is quite a bit of weight in the nose of the sustainer to assure stability. OR and Rocksim didn't exist when it was built, but when I get a little time I'm going to do an OR sim. If the sims look good I plan on flying it (if the RSO okays it), but it will definitely be a heads-up flight!
Click to expand...

Oh man, be sure to get a video! Looks awesome.

I couldn't tell from the photos, but does the booster have vents at the top for gap staging? That seems to be the ticket to getting reliable gap staging.
 
I am still working "behind the scenes" on this project . . .

I will post updates, once I have something to report.

In the meantime, feel free to post ideas and DATA !

Dave F.
 

Similar threads

Ez2cDave
NIKE AJAX - Upper Stage flown by itself ? Any data ?
Replies
2
Views
458
solidfluid
solidfluid
Ez2cDave
"UNUSUAL" Nike-Tomahawk - Poker Flat
Replies
0
Views
381
Ez2cDave
Ez2cDave
Ez2cDave
  • Locked
Calling All Talented "Photo Scalers" . . . I Need More Eyes - NIKE-TOMAHAWK 18.26 IA !
2
Replies
46
Views
2K
solidfluid
solidfluid
Jay Dub 4009
1/3 Scale Nike Tomahawk build
3 4 5
Replies
121
Views
10K
Ez2cDave
Ez2cDave
charrington
BT-60 Estes Nike Smoke modified for HPR
Replies
8
Views
933
SolarYellow
SolarYellow

Latest posts

Back
Top