Any LPR kits for the AGM-78 Standard ARM?

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

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

brockrwood

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jun 9, 2015
Messages
2,983
Reaction score
3,641
Location
Denver, Colorado, USA
I was recently reading about anti-radiation missiles (ARM’s). These missiles are used to destroy enemy radar sites (most of the time associated with enemy SAM batteries and other anti-aircraft weapons).

Many of the missiles looked cool but were not suitable as scale or semi-scale model rockets because they have large forward fins. :-(

The AGM-78 Standard ARM from the 60’s was an exception. It has longitudinal ribs but no large fins up front.

See link.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-78_Standard_ARM
Anyone know of an LPR kit of the AGM-78?
 
I made a BT-60 downscale of this 6in version a few months ago as a test with my new laser cutter. It looks real nice, not sure how accurate it is to scale. I think the original might have actually been an upscale because the body tube came to almost exactly 18" which seems coincidental. Haven't flown it yet, waiting for weather to clear up so I can paint it.
 

Attachments

  • AGM-78 Standard ARM.rkt
    223.7 KB · Views: 0
For LPR, go with the FlisKit Tartar. It's a fun but challenging build that flies well. Paint it white and only a Messerschmitt-measuring scale weenie will know the difference. It would be easy to modify it into a more accurate representation of an ARM-78/RIM-66/AIM-97 if you are so inclined.
 
The Launch Pad HARM rocket kit is cool looking! How is it not unstable with those big, forward fins?
Unfortunately, The Launch Pad is out of business now. I read the Rocket Reviews and neither review says anything about nose weight. However, both reviews say that the model flew straight. Over the years I have had several The Launch Pad kits and they were fun and flew good. As I recall one of the kits had the motor recessed into the body tube a little bit. I did not like this because although the body tube was a larger diameter than the motor, the exposed inner body tube got singed a little bit. Moving the motor forward a little bit would move the c.g. forward slightly. I don't know if this was used on this model or not. I don't know if this model used nose weight.
 
I don't know if this model used nose weight.

https://www.rocketreviews.com/launch-pad-the-harm-agm-88a--by-joe-cacciatore.html"The nose cone is plastic and uses clay weights for proper center of gravity."

From my experience with TLP, they're usually copies of actual missiles, so the designs are often inherently unstable (so guided missiles can easily change directions), requiring nose weight to be added.

Very lightweight construction, added nose weight and high thrust motors are usually the recipe with these.
 
I have built a 4" AGM 78 way, way back, can't remember the manufacturer.

Never flown. BAAAR. Despite the wood fins, it's quite light. High G, H minimum.

I'll have to get the CP/CG the hard way with this one.

Please excuse the yellow top coat, it was what was at hand at the time. I plan to make it more "correct".

70" tall.

That's an actual booger on the second pic, right fin. Not a paint defect.

AGM78.jpegAGM78-2.jpeg
 
Last edited:
I have built a 4" AGM 78 way, way back, can't remember the manufacturer.

Never flown. BAAAR. Despite the wood fins, it's quite light. High G, H minimum.

I'll have to get the CP/CG the hard way with this one.

Please excuse the yellow top coat, it was what was at hand at the time. I plan to make it more "correct".

70" tall.

That's an actual booger on the second pic, right fin. Not a paint defect.

View attachment 623241View attachment 623242
Looks good
 
Back
Top