BOMARC data sets

[kbfrazier]

Hello,

I'm planning on attending NARAM 63 and will enter a BOMARC for the Sport Scale event. The scale will be based off a 2" tube and not the standard BOMARC kits that are commercially available.

I'm gathering the data and was told that Vladimir Minakov's drawing of the BOMARC may not be the most accurate and might cost me points on the data side. Has anyone had issues using his drawings. I've also hear that Peter Alway has a set based on the ROTW formats. I want to max out on the data points so I'm wanting the input of judges and NARAM officials themselves as to which data set would be best to use. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

BTW - Does anyone know if has a PDF of his BOMARC drawing?

Besides having to travel to measure a real missile, I hope the drawings will be the best option.

Keith

 

[PeterAlway]

My drawing is based on an official drawing (Boeing or USAF, unfortunately the title block is missing from my photocopy) filled in with measurements filling in the ramjet nacelles. Min shows the Bomarc A. It appears in "Selected USAF Missiles of the Cold War," available from ARA Press, eRockets, and ASP. Minakov's drawing is very detailed, but it's not at all clear what his sources were, and if they might have been based on photos. His drawing is the Bomarc B version.

 

[Brent]

I would love for someone to make an stl file for the Ram jet engine parts with the correct scale profile, I have seen the ones on Shapeways but would love to be able to create one the size of the Estes NCR Bomarc.

 

[Ez2cDave]

Hello,

I'm planning on attending NARAM 63 and will enter a BOMARC for the Sport Scale event. The scale will be based off a 2" tube and not the standard BOMARC kits that are commercially available.

I'm gathering the data and was told that Vladimir Minakov's drawing of the BOMARC may not be the most accurate and might cost me points on the data side. Has anyone had issues using his drawings. I've also hear that Peter Alway has a set based on the ROTW formats. I want to max out on the data points so I'm wanting the input of judges and NARAM officials themselves as to which data set would be best to use. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

BTW - Does anyone know if has a PDF of his BOMARC drawing?

Besides having to travel to measure a real missile, I hope the drawings will be the best option.

Keith

Keith,

You will not be penalized for using different, even inaccurate, data. Your model will be judged by how closely it matches the data that is supplied by you. Judges can only evaluate your model, based on your data. They cannot use other sources, or their own personal knowledge of the prototype, to penalize your model. If that were to occur, you should immediately file a protest and, if necessary, seek for that judge to be removed from the Judging Panel.

Dave F.

 

[BigMacDaddy]

I do not know where all these came from but here is what I had in my folder for making my Bomarc...

 

[John Brohm]

The plan is from the October 1958 issue of Model Airplane News, I believe.

 

[kbfrazier]

I would love for someone to make an stl file for the Ram jet engine parts with the correct scale profile, I have seen the ones on Shapeways but would love to be able to create one the size of the Estes NCR Bomarc.

By any chance would you have a copy of the instructions for the NCR/Estes BOMARC kit. Just need to figure out how they created the tapered nacelles to create a proper 3D part.

Keith

 

[Initiator001]

By any chance would you have a copy of the instructions for the NCR/Estes BOMARC kit. Just need to figure out how they created the tapered nacelles to create a proper 3D part.

Keith

The ramjet nacelles were vac-formed parts.

 

[BigMacDaddy]

Here is the link to the PDF of instruction sheets for the Estes model...

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1c2VbHJoZZ5gW-2CviOK1A2kGzG061qQE/view?usp=sharing

 

[Ez2cDave]

A few items . . .

 

[Ez2cDave]

BOMARC - Set 1

 

[Ez2cDave]

BOMARC - Set 2 . . .

 

[Ez2cDave]

BOMARC - Set 3 . . .

 

[Ez2cDave]

BOMARC - Set 4 . . .

 

[Ez2cDave]

BOMARC - Set 5 . . .

 

[James Duffy]

Minakov drawings are usually photo-interpreted guesswork. Pretty, but guesswork.

Peter Alway's drawing of the BOMARC may be found in this highly-recommended monograph:

https://www.arapress.com/selected-usaf-missiles-of-the-cold-war/

 

[Ez2cDave]

Minakov drawings are usually photo-interpreted guesswork. Pretty, but guesswork.

Peter Alway's drawing of the BOMARC may be found in this highly-recommended monograph:

https://www.arapress.com/selected-usaf-missiles-of-the-cold-war/

Scale models are judged by the model's accuracy, relative to the data submitted. The accuracy of the data is not assessed during judging. A number of Peter Alway's drawings are known to have discrepancies and incorrect dimensions, also.

A model is scored by its accuracy, relative to dimensioned data supplied in the data pack. Any other data, not submitted by the modeler may not be considered when judging the model.

If a modeler submitted data, showing that a SATURN V was only 250 ft tall, instead of 363 ft, the model should only be judged against the submitted data pack, even if the judge "knows better" ( i.e the SATURN V is 363 ft tall, not 250 ft tall ).

Minakov drawings also offer a lot of surface detail ( accurate or not), while Alway drawings do not. This would allow a modeler, using Minakov data, to document fine details and be awarded points for including them.

Say that two BOMARC models were submitted by two different competitors, on using ROTW data and the other using Minakov data. The models are built to the same scale factor and are of the same prototype number. A judge can't, ethically, put the two models side by side and praise one ( ROTW data ), while disparaging the other ( Minakov data ). Each model must be judged by its fidelity to the data submitted with it, not by any other "standard".

 

[BigMacDaddy]

So difficult to find accurate scale data... and so frustrating when measuring pictures that are not square on... So risky to rely on other pictures that are not photos not to mention risk of relying on 3D models that others have made...

 

[PeterAlway]

Contest models are judged against the data you provide. Minakov was fallible;I am fallible. More importantly, Minakov drew the Bomarc B, while I drew the Bomarc A. The most obvious difference between the models is the profile of the ramjet nacelles. The back half of the Bomarc B nacelles are straight cylinders, while the back half of the Bomarc A nacelles have a narrowed "waist." There are other differences in the overall length of the fuselage (the B is longer) and in the position of the wings (the B wings are farther forward, giving a larger gap between the wings and tail surfaces). I don't know what other differences there are. I haven't compared my sources to Minakov's drawings because I don't know if other differences would be differences between versions or if they would be errors in his photo-interpretation.
Notice that the drawings and photos posted here are a mix of Bomarc A and Bomarc B. Check the shape of the Nacelles to be sure you are doing everything for the same version of the missile.

 

[Richard N]

These are drawings from the Belcher Bits Bomarc A and B 1/72 scale kits done by the same source allowing for a comparison of the versions. A note about his sources and research is included.

 

[Private]

A few items . . .

View attachment 561033View attachment 561034View attachment 561035View attachment 561036

Where abouts did you find these drawings for the Canadian markings on the Bomarc? When I go through all the photos I have collected online, they all have some minor variations to the markings and colour scheme. The closest one I found was of the BOMARC on a pedestal outside North Bay, Ontario. The difference here is CAF vs RCAF.

Anyways, I was wondering if I could get a copy of those drawings if possible?

I recently picked up the MadCow 2.6" BOMARC and I am looking at doing up a Canadian paint scheme and custom decals for it.

 

[BigMacDaddy]

Does anyone have insights on the main / booster engine exhaust shroud details?

The Bomarc A had a Aerojet General LR59-AJ-13 booster and the Bomarc B had a Thiokol XM51 booster. My latest assumption is that the A had the slightly longer / exposed shroud and the B had the enclosed motor area w/ skirt based on the pictures I am finding. Is this correct?

The above scale pictures show a distinctive look down to a count of rivets (this scale data is for a Bomarc B).

However, photos seem to show a slightly different look / configuration (although the above is obviously a rough drawing):


It looks like the Bomarc A had a more exposed shroud on the booster:

 

[burkefj]

The kit drawings shown above have horribly incorrect nose cone profiles, pics of actual missiles are much more pointy..

 

[Private]

Does anyone have insights on the main / booster engine exhaust shroud details?

The Bomarc A had a Aerojet General LR59-AJ-13 booster and the Bomarc B had a Thiokol XM51 booster. My latest assumption is that the A had the slightly longer / exposed shroud and the B had the enclosed motor area w/ skirt based on the pictures I am finding. Is this correct?


View attachment 615291

For the B&W photo of the BOMARC B you have from the National Pacific Exhibition in Vancouver in 1962, I have another photo showing that BOMARC being assembled and prepped for display. Since it is not fully assembled at this stage, the main engine skirt is not on yet and you can get a better idea of what the B's nozzle looks like.

All the other photos I have are of the B model and either the nozzle is hidden in the bunker, wrong angle, out of frame, or used as a mounting point for the static display (damn you Edmonton). Having said that of the model B's I have been looking at where I can see the motor nozzle all have what appears to be a fabric skirt.

 

[BigMacDaddy]

For the B&W photo of the BOMARC B you have from the National Pacific Exhibition in Vancouver in 1962, I have another photo showing that BOMARC being assembled and prepped for display. Since it is not fully assembled at this stage, the main engine skirt is not on yet and you can get a better idea of what the B's nozzle looks like.

All the other photos I have are of the B model and either the nozzle is hidden in the bunker, wrong angle, out of frame, or used as a mounting point for the static display (damn you Edmonton). Having said that of the model B's I have been looking at where I can see the motor nozzle all have what appears to be a fabric skirt.

Thank you - nice to have a picture of the motor without the skirt on the B just to understand what I am looking at some more.

 

[Private]

Thank you - nice to have a picture of the motor without the skirt on the B just to understand what I am looking at some more.

I actually originally assumed you had this photo. I cant remember the site I snagged mine from, but when I did there was the one you posted, mine, and another I did not post. I only recently started hunting down material for the BOMARC's and have primarily been focused on the Canadian ones. I am a wee bit biased being Canadian and my little bit of tie in is that the BOMARC on the pedestal in North Bay was actually dismounted, restored and remounted by my fathers unit at CFB North Bay in about 1990. Neither my father sqn are around any more to question or get answers from unfortunately.

I keep wondering if that skirt is akin to a sacrificial dust cover. It would either blow off or rip away at launch or in flight and was mainly there to keep dirt and rodents out. Pure speculation on my part. Though if I ever meet the person responsible for the BOMARC exhibit at the National Space and Aviation Unit in Ottawa, I intend to ask them!

Also I loved your B&W of the workshop. I had not seen that one before. Bases on the picture of the B&W A model being launched, I am not so sure the nozzle is that much shorter than the B. The only way I know how to distinguish them is the shape of the 2 Ramjets mounted to the fuselage. If the tubes are are mainly straight then its a model B and if the tubes have a slight indent they are model A.

 

[BigMacDaddy]

I actually originally assumed you had this photo. I cant remember the site I snagged mine from, but when I did there was the one you posted, mine, and another I did not post. I only recently started hunting down material for the BOMARC's and have primarily been focused on the Canadian ones. I am a wee bit biased being Canadian and my little bit of tie in is that the BOMARC on the pedestal in North Bay was actually dismounted, restored and remounted by my fathers unit at CFB North Bay in about 1990. Neither my father sqn are around any more to question or get answers from unfortunately.

I keep wondering if that skirt is akin to a sacrificial dust cover. It would either blow off or rip away at launch or in flight and was mainly there to keep dirt and rodents out. Pure speculation on my part. Though if I ever meet the person responsible for the BOMARC exhibit at the National Space and Aviation Unit in Ottawa, I intend to ask them!

Also I loved your B&W of the workshop. I had not seen that one before. Bases on the picture of the B&W A model being launched, I am not so sure the nozzle is that much shorter than the B. The only way I know how to distinguish them is the shape of the 2 Ramjets mounted to the fuselage. If the tubes are are mainly straight then its a model B and if the tubes have a slight indent they are model A.

That B&W Photo was from this document: media.defense.gov/2020/Sep/02/2002490101/-1/-1/1/WINGED%20MISSILES-SM.PDF

I have made a Bomarc before but I made a bunch of compromises on scale (it was one of my earlier rocket designs). I am working to create a much more accurate semi/sport-scale Bomarc A and Bomarc B versions (both will be BT-60 scale w/ 3D printed parts and plywood fins/wings). These are a couple of finished versions of my previous version (finishing done by others).

 

[Private]

That B&W Photo was from this document: media.defense.gov/2020/Sep/02/2002490101/-1/-1/1/WINGED%20MISSILES-SM.PDF

I have made a Bomarc before but I made a bunch of compromises on scale (it was one of my earlier rocket designs). I am working to create a much more accurate semi/sport-scale Bomarc A and Bomarc B versions (both will be BT-60 scale w/ 3D printed parts and plywood fins/wings). These are a couple of finished versions of my previous version (finishing done by others).

View attachment 615394
View attachment 615395

Nice pdf document on the history of winged missiles. Even nod to Canada with the BOMARC. I found the web page that had most of the photos I grabbed. I used it because they were higher resolution than most of the other sites with the same photos that I visited. You can find it here:

https://www.silverhawkauthor.com/po...-boeing-cim-10b-bomarc-surface-to-air-missile
Its similar to your link's BOMARC write up but focused on the Canadian perspective.

Nice model A rockets you have. Nice details on the intakes for the ramjets.. I just noted that your top one is the paint scheme for the test missiles.

One thing I like about your rockets is that the main wing goes into the body tube. With the MadCow 2.6" version, the main wing attaches to the outside surface at a tangent point basically. You can make some serious underwing fillets as a result. However in my examination of actual BOMARCs, the wing are removable and attach to the main body tube. in several drawing you will note they put a nice flat arc where the curved surface of the wing meets the curved surface of the body tube. I was debating slicing off a section of my main body tube and dropping my wings into the cut out and then placing the cut off section of tubing back on top. I figured the plywood wings would restore any lost structural integrity of the tube from the cut out. I am still in the planning stages so I have not decided what to do yet.

Here is a picture of the BOMARC being installed in its display at the National Space and Aviation