Paul,
Is the decimal place for the 3rd number for the Sustainer Airframe length in the wrong place, i.e., should be 174?
Paul said:
TLP Prototype Predicted Re-scale
Sustainer Airframe Length 28.1 161.0702913 0.174457995
Since you have 3 numbers for the booster airframe length, I assume that TLP dimension is close. Is this right?
Booster Airframe Length 25.75 147.6 147.6
The first number is the dimension used in the TLP plan pack, the second is the prototype - from the Alway drawing of the Terrier booster (shown with the BBX), the third number is a predicted value based on the ratio of the booster length in the TLP plan pack and the booster length in the Alway drawing. Just shows how OFF the TLP numbers are!
Which BTW - the Alway dimension of 147.6 for the booster airframe length agrees perfectly with the drawing you provided.
Paul
If you look at the long fins on the sustainer, you will see that they are quite thick. In essence the TLP fins are just profiles (sports scale). I have looked at these fins on a standard missile in a rocket garden near us and wondered why they are so thick. I figure that they might be used as support in storage. Also, the rear fins look like they are on hinges and actually fold back.
Bob
Actually that number is correct - that's the scaling factor that I used as a multiplier for other dimensions.
I derived the .174 number by dividing 25.75 by 147.6 - that gives you a ratio between the dimensions on the TLP plan pack and the real thing.
From there, you can divide the other dimensions on the TLP plan pack by .174 to get a predicted value for the prototype - with this I could compare other known values to what was in the TLP plan pack (as shown in my post above).
VERY few of the dimensions are even remotely close. I am working on a dimension set now, and can show it scaled to almost any body tube size if you like.
As for the fins, there are three layers to the forward vanes on the missile itself, the center layer is fairly thin and protrudes beyond the outside supporting layers.
The rear fins do indeed fold - there's a box shaped hing area that has the same dimensions as the forward vanes, this allows the missile to fit in box launcher with the most compact dimensions. While older ships fed the missile up through the deck and onto a armed launcher (such as the Mk.26), most of the newer vessles - particularly anything with a VLS type launching system (Spruance, Ticos, Arleigh Burkes) - take advantage of the fin fold in the launcher itself.
HTH - will post more after I've had a chance to crunch all the numbers. I tend to scale projects based on a given tube size to produce the right length - so my models will never be a perfect 1/5 scale or anything like that, they'll be scaled to the tube diameter - and then all other dimensions matched to that one.
In the case of a missile like this one with two different tube sizes, I'll pick one tube and then will be forced to get the other as close as possible (my 7.5" booster should really be 8" - but there aren't any tubes that are conveniently available in an 8" size - that I've found).
Sorry for the confusion on the numbers, unfortunately Excel doesn't translate well to straight copies into the forum.
More later!
Paul
