"Navy Builds Ramjet Missile with Model Rocket Engines and a Credit Card"

sl98

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2012
Messages
561
Reaction score
103
I would be more impressed if they used an Eggfinder for tracking.
 

fyrwrxz

latest photo
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
7,263
Reaction score
716
It's just Mike-one of the few I know who can take a solid 5 lb block of metal and hand you a 14 oz mach ready fin can. Check them out at Binder Design
 

HHaase

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
880
Reaction score
333
NOW it makes sense why he was selling Binder but keeping the fin can side of things.
Nicely done!

-Hans
 

Bat-mite

Rocketeer in MD
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
11,931
Reaction score
2,730
Location
Maryland
Why would they publish this stuff.
Terrorists can read this stuff, get idea's and the next thing a know...
Double thumbs up for Binder Design for his involvement and success.

They would only publish if it is unclassified, meaning they believe it poses no threat to national security. How they arrived at that decision is a different question.
 

cwbullet

Obsessed with Rocketry
Staff member
Administrator
TRF Supporter
Global Mod
Joined
Jan 24, 2009
Messages
30,285
Reaction score
7,653
Location
Glennville, GA
Great job US Navy and Binder. I hope they continue to use cheap off the shelf products. We can help them make it cheaper. I will offer to do some scale testing.
 

aerostadt

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Oct 26, 2009
Messages
3,954
Reaction score
668
Location
Brigham City, UT
I remember my solid rocket employer went out and bought 24 mm model rocket components for a much smaller project more than 7 years ago. It turned out that this was the practical thing to do. It was much cheaper to buy the model rocket components rather than design and a build a motor to test out flight performance concepts for small flares.
 

Bat-mite

Rocketeer in MD
Joined
Dec 5, 2013
Messages
11,931
Reaction score
2,730
Location
Maryland
As for terrorists building one of these, they'd have to be Level 3 to buy the motor, so I think it's okay.

:roll:
 

samb

Lifetime Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
4,403
Reaction score
854
Location
Plano, TX
Why would they publish this stuff.
Terrorists can read this stuff, get idea's and the next thing a know...
Double thumbs up for Binder Design for his involvement and success.

On the contrary, sounds like us taking a page from the bad guys IED development program. And some good old American, Kelly Johnson, git'er done skunkworks initiative.
 

georgegassaway

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
5,042
Reaction score
1,124
Why would they publish this stuff.
Terrorists can read this stuff, get idea's and the next thing a know...

Terrorists have had their eyes on getting HPR motors since the at least the early 1990's, if not before....

Surprisingly enough the one known actual attempt to do so was by the IRA (Irish Republican Army), there was an arrest IIRC.

Anyway, an article mentioning buying a "$900 model rocket engine" or a fin can isn't something that would not already be on a terrorist idea list.

The really critical parts are the development of a Ramjet, and the guidance/control system. What I take from the article is that they were tasked with trying to develop a successful RAMJET engine for the intended size and range of the evenutal missile. So they were able ot focus a lot more of their hand-on efforts in designing and developing the ramjet. They did not need to develop a field-ready final missile design. So, they bought existing HPR engines and used either an existing fin can or morel likely had it custom-made by a supplier who could do so quickly and inexpensively. They got the ramjet to work, so now they can work on a final version which will be made in a more conventional fashion.

I have to say that more and more when it comes to terrorist possibly doing stuff with models, the "smarter plan" would be to use multicopters or "smart" R/C planes rather than Hobby Rockets. Easier and cheaper to do. Rockets would tend to be better for certain "airborne targeting", and some very specific kinds of ground targets where multicopters or smart planes would not be as suited for mission-unique reasons. Note I am not going to go into ANY details as to what those might be (and urge others not to speculate on any either), because yes indeed who really knows who might be reading this thread.

I just point out that when it comes to flying hobby models, possibly being used by terrorists, the allure of rockets as the primary means seems to have shifted now to far less likely due to the easier/cheaper (and potentially MUCH more effective) alternative of misused multicopters and R/C planes.

Having personally flown Quadcopters that can come back and land within 2 meters of where they took off from, really brought that home (so to speak....). And more recently using live FPV with a Quad and also with a R/C plane, to see straight ahead from onboard the model and use that view for piloting.

That does not mean we can be complacent about terrorists not wanting to try to use rockets. That will always exist. But it's not the only game in town for hobby models being misused by terrorists, and for the most part not the best game in town for "unwanted airborne delivery".
 
Last edited:

Binder Design

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
258
Where does it say they used a CTI motor or the Max-Q fin unit?

It doesn't. But I know who my customers are. I sent a lot of fin cans to China Lake that look exactly like the ones in that photo. And the Navy guy, Matt Walker they quoted for the article was the one who ordered them. :)
 

DavidMcCann

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2016
Messages
2,656
Reaction score
177
Where does it say they used a CTI motor or the Max-Q fin unit?

if you can't look at that photo and see a CTI motor... well then just wow.

Just going out on a limb here, but this is an O3400.....

20982648492_4fcd67e955_h.jpg


and the navy-
gallery-1490033481-flight-test-web-banner-edit-640x300.jpg
 
Last edited:

Binder Design

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2009
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
258
NOW it makes sense why he was selling Binder but keeping the fin can side of things.
Nicely done!

-Hans

We pulled it off the market and doubled down before the first of the year. That's when we decided to purchase Dog House Rocketry. Crazy busy around these parts.
 

JackC

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
May 2, 2020
Messages
415
Reaction score
282
We pulled it off the market and doubled down before the first of the year. That's when we decided to purchase Dog House Rocketry. Crazy busy around these parts.

Mike, how difficult would it be to design and build a ramjet rocket in high power? Would it run afoul of any rules? Thanks!

Jack
 

boatgeek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
4,973
Reaction score
4,121
Why would they publish this stuff.
Terrorists can read this stuff, get idea's and the next thing a know...
Double thumbs up for Binder Design for his involvement and success.
As for terrorists building one of these, they'd have to be Level 3 to buy the motor, so I think it's okay.

:roll:

Not to mention that terrorists already know how to build unguided rockets (see Katushya and Qassam, for example). I would be shocked if designs for those and the relevant propellant formulas are not available to anyone with appropriate bona fides. The Qassam apparently uses sugar-KNO3 fuel, so Nakka may be more relevant than CTI.
 
Top