Aerobee 300 details wanted

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

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

tsmith1315

Not a shrubber
TRF Supporter
Joined
May 16, 2020
Messages
4,720
Reaction score
5,662
Location
Doerun, GA
I'm looking for information about the Aerobee 300, cosmetics of the IGY flight modeled by the Estes version in particular. Any details would be appreciated.

I have Peter's drawing, the great Aerobee sounding rocket article from HPR magazine years ago, one small image of what appears to be the real rocket Estes was modeling, and Peter's note here in TRF that the main color was most likely white and not silver. I have perused all 30-something pages of posts here in the scale forum, and all threads within that looked like they could divulge any info.

The image of the real one shows an atypical conduit, maybe 60% of the sustainer length, and not extended forward to the adapter or aft to the fins. It's not obvious if the other two are the same or if they even exist. I don't see the Aerobee logo or the Aerojet General logo. Seams and/or screws are visible, but not well-illustrated. I would especially like to know what the wording barely visible in the middle of the sustainer is.

aerobee-300.jpg

The (payload?) designation on Estes' decal is AF AA 10.12. I get nothing on that with Google and it's not in the listing on Gunter's Space Page, although it seems to be in reasonable sequence when compared to the IGY flights listed there for this rocket. Those are AA 10.01, and AA 10.02 from Oct 1958.

Gunter's page:
space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau_fam/aerobee.htm

My plan is to build this 300, the NRL-51 100 Jr with the Arcon nose, and an early Aerobee with the short sustainer and tail cone. So beware, questions about these other two will be next!!!
 
Tim,

AEROBEE 300 . . .

Dave F.
 

Attachments

  • Aerobee-300 - LARGE.jpg
    Aerobee-300 - LARGE.jpg
    118.6 KB · Views: 2
  • Aerobee-300(150A).jpg
    Aerobee-300(150A).jpg
    202.9 KB · Views: 1
  • DIMENSIONS - 2.JPG
    DIMENSIONS - 2.JPG
    39.1 KB · Views: 1
  • Aerobee300Ap-p.jpg
    Aerobee300Ap-p.jpg
    40.3 KB · Views: 1
  • AEROBEE 300 - LARGE - ADJ.jpg
    AEROBEE 300 - LARGE - ADJ.jpg
    67.8 KB · Views: 2
  • DIMENSIONS.JPG
    DIMENSIONS.JPG
    92 KB · Views: 2
  • PAYLOAD.JPG
    PAYLOAD.JPG
    53.1 KB · Views: 1
  • Aerobee-300-3.jpg
    Aerobee-300-3.jpg
    73.4 KB · Views: 1
  • aerobee_300_decal_white_2__44674.1506083449.1280.1280.jpg
    aerobee_300_decal_white_2__44674.1506083449.1280.1280.jpg
    36.2 KB · Views: 1
AEROBEE 100 JR . . .

Data for the ARCON nose cone version have been posted in the Scale forum.

Dave F.
 

Attachments

  • NEWSPAPER - 2 - ADJ.jpg
    NEWSPAPER - 2 - ADJ.jpg
    186.4 KB · Views: 0
  • NEWSPAPER - 3  - ADJ.jpg
    NEWSPAPER - 3 - ADJ.jpg
    182.2 KB · Views: 1
  • NEWSPAPER - 1 - ADJ.jpg
    NEWSPAPER - 1 - ADJ.jpg
    315.9 KB · Views: 0
  • Aerobee100.jpg
    Aerobee100.jpg
    41.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 1a.JPG
    1a.JPG
    25.1 KB · Views: 0
  • Aerobee 100 mockup-model.png
    Aerobee 100 mockup-model.png
    622.3 KB · Views: 0
  • Aerobee100p-p.jpg
    Aerobee100p-p.jpg
    39 KB · Views: 0
Tim,

AEROBEE 300 . . .

Dave F.

Thanks for the info, Dave!

I recently found pics of the guys working on that 300A. I assumed that since it said 150A on the side, it was just a 150A with a different payload/nose cone rather than the Sparrow 3rd stage. I'll look at that one more closely this evening and post what I have.

Do you know if 300's got their own logo?

AEROBEE 100 JR . . .

Data for the ARCON nose cone version have been posted in the Scale forum.

Dave F.

I think there's enough info in that thread to make a decent version of that Jr.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_4855.JPG
    IMG_4855.JPG
    56.7 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_4859.JPG
    IMG_4859.JPG
    38.5 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_4858.JPG
    IMG_4858.JPG
    45 KB · Views: 5
  • IMG_4857.JPG
    IMG_4857.JPG
    48.4 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_4856.JPG
    IMG_4856.JPG
    52 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_4854.JPG
    IMG_4854.JPG
    51.9 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_4853.JPG
    IMG_4853.JPG
    84.5 KB · Views: 2
  • IMG_4301.JPG
    IMG_4301.JPG
    100.4 KB · Views: 1
  • IMG_4241.JPG
    IMG_4241.JPG
    87.1 KB · Views: 2
AEROBEE 100 data . . . MINAKOV

Dave
 

Attachments

  • 06.JPG
    06.JPG
    103.4 KB · Views: 0
  • 05.JPG
    05.JPG
    119.3 KB · Views: 0
  • 02.JPG
    02.JPG
    126.1 KB · Views: 1
  • 04.JPG
    04.JPG
    128.6 KB · Views: 2
  • Aerobee 100 NRL 51 - CROP FOR SCALING.jpg
    Aerobee 100 NRL 51 - CROP FOR SCALING.jpg
    55.7 KB · Views: 0
  • Aerobee 100 NRL 51.jpg
    Aerobee 100 NRL 51.jpg
    149.4 KB · Views: 2
  • 03.JPG
    03.JPG
    123.5 KB · Views: 1
AEROBEE 100 - MINAKOV ( cont. )

Dave F.
 

Attachments

  • 07.JPG
    07.JPG
    95.1 KB · Views: 0
  • 08.JPG
    08.JPG
    99.3 KB · Views: 0
  • 09.JPG
    09.JPG
    84.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 10.JPG
    10.JPG
    92.7 KB · Views: 0
  • 11.JPG
    11.JPG
    79.6 KB · Views: 0
I recently found pics of the guys working on that 300A. I assumed that since it said 150A on the side, it was just a 150A with a different payload/nose cone rather than the Sparrow 3rd stage. I'll look at that one more closely this evening and post what I have.

Actually, I only found one picture of that 300A. Advertised as an "Original NASA Press Photo Aerbec 150A Two Stage Sounding Rocket", I took what it said as correct.

Here's the picture:
Aerobee 150A.png


And on the back of that picture, this is written in faded blue mimeograph-looking copy:

"For Release Immediate
Photo No. 63-Aerobee-3

If this photo is used for advertising purposes copy and
layout must be submitted to NASA for approval prior to release.

Wallops Island, Va. - The Aerobee 150 - two
stage sounding rocket developing 1900 lbs of thrust
is being prepared for liftoff. The instrumented
nose cone will be carried to 152 miles altitude."


Although this copy says the rocket is a two-stage 150A, closer inspection of the picture shows the print isn't correct for this rocket:

NASA 6.08 July 1963.png

On the adapter is written NASA 6.08 and the date 7-12-63. The 6 in the flight number indicates an Aerobee 300/300A, aka Spaerobee. The 08 is the unique flight number, and GA indicates Goddard instruments, Aeronomy experiment.


According to NASA Tech Report R-226, flight 6.08 GA was flown on 7-20-1963 to an altitude of 210 miles, and had a third stage.

1963 Aerobee flights.png

Aerobee 300A overview Flight 6.08GA Wallops 7-20-1963.png

Aerobee 300A Flight 6.08GA Wallops 7-20-1963.png




While none of this detail is for the IGY flight I want to model, it's the only decent photo of a 300/300A that I have found.

This leaves me two main questions about the 300's:

- Did any of them actually use "Aerobee 300" as a logo?

- Is this payload size unique, or are the payload sections typically smaller than the 8" dia Sparrow? This looks to be about 6½" for the instrument payload & nose cone. Every model I've seen has a single-diameter 3rd stage.


@Ez2cDave, do you know where this image originates? It looks like a page from a bound notebook:

436985-Aerobee300Ap-p.jpg
 
Last edited:
OK, here's what I know about that Aerobee 300. The photo is from "Sounding Rocket Study of Eighteen Vehicles" by Vought Astronautics, 1961. I managed to score a copy from a retiring professor about 30 years ago, and Jim Ball posted them to his now-defunct scale data page. What made an Aerobee 300 an Aerobee 300 was the modified Sparrow upper stage. The fin can was replaced with an adapter that functioned as a stabilizing cone and as a high-expansion nozzle for high-altitude efficiency. Whether it was literally replaced by unscrewing one and screwing in the other, or if the cone was incorporated in the manufacturing process, I couldn't tell you. There was a cylindrical section below the cone that was dedicated to upper stage ignition--separation happened at the base of the cone.

The upper stage and ignition cylinder were attached, as if they were an interchangeable payload, to An Aerobee Hi, Aerobee 150, or Aerobee 150A. The Aerobee Hi was used for the pre-NASA Aerobee 300 launches. NASA used the 3-finned Aerobee 150 for its Aerobee 300 launches from Fort Churchill, Manitoba, and the 4-finned Aerobee 150A for its Aerobee 300A launches from Wallops Island. As far as I can, the Aerobee sustainer stages were stock -Hi, 150, and 150A stages and were left painted and marked as such.

If I recall correctly, I've seen a photo of one of the upper stages with an Aerobee 300 logo on it, as shown on Dave F's model photo.

I believe the original Aerobee 300 photo was taken before the conduit fairings were attached. I believe that different bits of plumbing and wiring were concealed within the fairings, and I suspect you are seeing a propellant pressure line in that image (there are reports laying out the plumbing that you could use to sort that out). You can see attachment doodads along the length of where the conduit will be installed. I think that an early version of the Estes kit used a long launch lug to represent that line. Later kits had the full-length fairing, representative of the launch configuration.

Stage count for Aerobees is ambiguous. Some sources count the booster as a stage, while some don't. So the Aerobee 300 might be called a 2-stage rocket in some contexts, and a 3-stage rocket in others. In the 50's, there was a sense that if a booster was small enough compared to the stage above it (like the Aerobee booster), it didn't count as a proper stage, so you would call it a boosted single stage rocket.

Notice that the Aerobee 300A in the picture has a payload that is thinner than the 8" Sparrow upper stage. The early flights had full 8-inch payloads.

I hope this is somewhat clear!
 
First off, Peter, I greatly appreciate the input.

There was a cylindrical section below the cone that was dedicated to upper stage ignition--separation happened at the base of the cone.

I would assume this ignition section below the blowout diaphragm that is the 9" cylinder that's shown on all of the drawings, and below that is the typical Hi/150/150A section with the roll jets. But this photo does make me question if those are roll jets just below the blowout diaphragm.

1653629134632.png

The Aerobee Hi was used for the pre-NASA Aerobee 300 launches. NASA used the 3-finned Aerobee 150 for its Aerobee 300 launches from Fort Churchill, Manitoba, and the 4-finned Aerobee 150A for its Aerobee 300A launches from Wallops Island. As far as I can, the Aerobee sustainer stages were stock -Hi, 150, and 150A stages and were left painted and marked as such.

Great! Though the I.G.Y. 300 flights were right around the time NASA was created, all of the flights I can find in 1958 were Aerobees or Aerobee Hi's. The flight numbers are (Air Force?) AA designations and not NASA 6.xx numbers. So, I feel comfortable with calling the 300 from the Vought Astronautics book an Aerobee Hi- based 300. Thanks for that tidbit!


1653626767841.png

I believe the original Aerobee 300 photo was taken before the conduit fairings were attached. I believe that different bits of plumbing and wiring were concealed within the fairings, and I suspect you are seeing a propellant pressure line in that image (there are reports laying out the plumbing that you could use to sort that out). You can see attachment doodads along the length of where the conduit will be installed.

Agreed. What looked like a short fairing is most likely plumbing, because the bracket bolts are visible on the sides of it. Every picture I've seen of the conduit shows recessed screws and no protrusions.

Notice that the Aerobee 300A in the picture has a payload that is thinner than the 8" Sparrow upper stage. The early flights had full 8-inch payloads.

Yeah, that smaller diameter payload/nose was the first thing that made me question what I was looking at.

That's a beautiful B&W picture, an 8x10 that was listed on ebay. After sorting out the flight number, I went back and bought it! Hopefully it will show up in a few days.


Thanks so much for the help!
 
I haven't been able to find great data on the LS-A, but I did publish a wee drawing of it using the data I could find. It was not part of the Lambda family, as the Lambda was an ISAS rocket and the LS-A was a NASDA rocket, part of a series that led to liquid-propelled launch vehicles (I'm not 100% sure the LS-A was liquid off the top of my head).
 

Attachments

  • LS-A.GIF
    LS-A.GIF
    47.6 KB · Views: 1
there is a 4 fin booster in the back ground

Ah, I see the confusion. Aerobee/Hi/100/Jr/150/150A rockets were all 2-stage like this image shows. None flew without that booster.

What most Aerobee kits model isn’t the complete rocket. This is the complete standard Aerobee:

Aerobee cutaway.jpg


The Aerobee liquid motor wasn't a high thrust motor and couldn't get the rocket up to speed quickly enough. So all of them used a short, fast-burning solid fuel JATO booster similar to the Wac Corporal, just for 1000' or so. That's what you see behind the sustainer in that picture in your post. Both motors were ignited at launch, so the sustainer would be at operating thrust by the time the booster was done. You can see both motors burning in your video links above.


It’s a bit tricky to model that booster with the interstate coupler being open. The struts aren't straight, either. So most kits just ignore that part and only give you the sustainer.


The Aerobee 300 and 300A added an 8" solid motor from the AIM-7 Sparrow missile for an additional 3rd stage. This part here, and I'm pretty sure it flew with the transition cone in place:

Aerobee 300 Upper - Sparrow 2.png


I've found virtually no pictures of the complete 300 other than this one from post# 13 above. In this flight, the 3rd stage motor is white, and the payload looks to be smaller dia but longer than the flight that Estes was modeling. This one still has the 150A logo, but with the additional upper stage it is indeed a 300A. Here you can also see that one conduit is extended longer to reach the upper stage.
1701908598396.png


The Aerobee 170 and 350 also used a solid booster, but they used the larger Nike booster instead.
 
Back
Top