AFFDL Tactical High Altitude Penetrator (THAP)

[Hydroman]

On the Northrop brochure, it was a plan view photo, had more of a "blended, humped" center section then tapered down to a point at the back end, similar curved wing tips and more of a pronounced cockpit area.

 

[quellish]

but why? shape and sting placement are the same, it's just turned up down

My impression, and I may be very wrong, is that the model in the AvLeak photo is wider, and the "canopy" does not look like the model in the AFFDL paper. The photos of the model in the AFFDL did not scan well, so it may have the "canopy" but isn't visible/discernable.

The paper references two previous papers that describe earlier wind tunnel investigations of the THAP configuration from 1975 and 1976. That sets the origins of THAP much earlier than I had previously believed. Both of those papers are AFIT masters thesis, indicating at least at the time THAP was not particularly sensitive.

Other material I have found indicates that THAP did not have a particularly low signature by the standards set by the XST models, but may have been considered low by someone who did not have knowledge of that program.

 

[quellish]

but why? shape and sting placement are the same, it's just turned up down

My impression, and I may be very wrong, is that the model in the AvLeak photo is wider, and the "canopy" does not look like the model in the AFFDL paper. The photos of the model in the AFFDL did not scan well, so it may have the "canopy" but isn't visible/discernable.

The paper references two previous papers that describe earlier wind tunnel investigations of the THAP configuration from 1975 and 1976. That sets the origins of THAP much earlier than I had previously believed. Both of those papers are AFIT masters thesis, indicating at least at the time THAP was not particularly sensitive.

Other material I have found indicates that THAP did not have a particularly low signature by the standards set by the XST models, but may have been considered low by someone who did not have knowledge of that program.

Better images from same scan. Higher resolution, large images

 

[quellish]

Wind Tunnel Test of an AFFDL Tactical High Altitude Penetrator (THAP)


https://books.google.com/books/about/Wind_Tunnel_Test_of_an_AFFDL_Tactical_Hi.html?id=r5VLxdeqeMQC

An earlier paper (thesis) that was referenced in "Wind Tunnel Test of an AFFDL Tactical High Altitude Penetrator (THAP)" is now available on DTIC:

"An Aerodynamic Investigation of a Low Aspect Ratio Wing" (ADA021733)

An Aerodynamic Investigation of a Low Aspect Ratio Wing

The study consisted of modeling and testing a high-speed, low aspect ratio flying wing no conventional center body or fuselage to determine its lift, drag, and static stability characteristics at Mach numbers of 0.70 to 0.86. Six different configurations of stabilizing fins were tested along...

apps.dtic.mil

This thesis is from 1975 and refers to the concept as coming from AFFDL, which would put the beginning of the low signature concept that became THAP as ~1973 or earlier.

 

[Scott Kenny]

My impression, and I may be very wrong, is that the model in the AvLeak photo is wider, and the "canopy" does not look like the model in the AFFDL paper. The photos of the model in the AFFDL did not scan well, so it may have the "canopy" but isn't visible/discernable.

The paper references two previous papers that describe earlier wind tunnel investigations of the THAP configuration from 1975 and 1976. That sets the origins of THAP much earlier than I had previously believed. Both of those papers are AFIT masters thesis, indicating at least at the time THAP was not particularly sensitive.

Other material I have found indicates that THAP did not have a particularly low signature by the standards set by the XST models, but may have been considered low by someone who did not have knowledge of that program.

I mean, a 2-orders-of-magnitude drop in RCS is pretty impressive by most people's standards. But when the XSTs were pushing 5 orders of magnitude, 2 is not impressive.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

KIDDER, A. R.
Tactical High Altitude Penetrator (THAP) Survivability Analysis.
AD-C016 397 79-5 Fld/Gp 17/4

MELLENGER, T. H.
Tactical High Altitude Penetrator (THAP)Survivability Analysis.
AD-C016 397 79-5 Fld/Gp 17/4

YOUNG, M.C.
Tactical High Altitude Penetrator (THAP) Survivability Analysis
AD-C016 397 79-5 Fld/Gp 17/4

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

AD - C016 397 Fld . 17/4 , 1517
CALSPAN CORP BUFFALO NY
TACTICAL HIGH ALTITUDE PENETRATOR (THAP) SURVIVABILITY ANALYSIS .
( U)Final rept. 15 Nov 76-20 Apr 77,by A. R. Kidder, M. C. Young and T. H. Mellenger. Jul 77 , 149p.
Řept. no .CALSPAN -KB-5981- X - 2
Contract F33615-76 - C - 1212 , Proj. 1207 , Task03
AFFDL TR-77-93
Secret report
Descriptors: * Penetration aids, “ Radar jamming, Expendable, Aircraft defense systems, Tactical aircraft, High altitude, Radar cross sections, Survival (General),Threat evaluation , Antiaircraft missiles, Sur face to air missiles, Search radar, Digital simulation , Tactical analyses
Surface - to - air missile (SAM) system threats were analyzed to determine which ones were viable threats and under what conditions they would be a threat to a very low signature, very high altitude aircraft (THAP). The cost of balloon - borne expendable jammers targeted against search and height finder radars to aid the penetration of THAP was calculated. The first task determined which SAM systems could engage THAP. The second task evaluated tactics and countermeasures which would be appropriate to prevent successful engagements of THAP by SAM systems. To evaluate tactics and countermeasures to protect THAP, digital electronic warfare models up dated to 1990 threat systems, were used with aircraft radar cross section (RCS) estimates provided by AFAL, and aircraft altitude, speed , and roll estimates provided by AFFDL. The costs of expendable jammer systems to adequately protect THAP in a specified corridor as a function of conflict duration were calculated . Computation of penetration aid costs involved parametric balloon borne expendable characteristics ( electronics, batteries, and platforms) provided by ASD , AFAPL, and AFFDL and standard meteorological data .Estimates of the costs of aircraft to deliver the penetration aids were made assuming the very low signature aircraft were used to dispense the expendable jammers. (Author) (U)

 

[quellish]

AD - C016 397 Fld . 17/4 , 1517
CALSPAN CORP BUFFALO NY
TACTICAL HIGH ALTITUDE PENETRATOR (THAP) SURVIVABILITY ANALYSIS .(U)
Final rept. 15 Nov 76-20 Apr 77,by A. R. Kidder, M. C. Young and T. H. Mellenger. Jul 77 , 149p.
Řept. no CALSPAN -KB-5981-X-2
Contract F33615-76 - C - 1212 , Proj. 1207 , Task03
AFFDL TR-77-93
Secret report
Descriptors: * Penetration aids, “ Radar jamming, Expendable, Aircraft defense systems, Tactical aircraft, High altitude, Radar cross sections, Survival (General),Threat evaluation , Antiaircraft missiles, Sur face to air missiles, Search radar, Digital simulation , Tactical analyses
Surface - to - air missile (SAM) system threats were analyzed to determine which ones were viable threats and under what conditions they would be a threat to a very low signature, very high altitude aircraft (THAP). The cost of balloon - borne expendable jammers targeted against search and height finder radars to aid the penetration of THAP was calculated. The first task determined which SAM systems could engage THAP. The second task evaluated tactics and countermeasures which would be appropriate to prevent successful engagements of THAP by SAM systems. To evaluate tactics and countermeasures to protect THAP, digital electronic warfare models up dated to 1990 threat systems, were used with aircraft radar cross section (RCS) estimates provided by AFAL, and aircraft altitude, speed , and roll estimates provided by AFFDL. The costs of expendable jammer systems to adequately protect THAP in a specified corridor as a function of conflict duration were calculated . Computation of penetration aid costs involved parametric balloon borne expendable characteristics ( electronics, batteries, and platforms) provided by ASD , AFAPL, and AFFDL and standard meteorological data .Estimates of the costs of aircraft to deliver the penetration aids were made assuming the very low signature aircraft were used to dispense the expendable jammers. (Author) (U)

Yup, was posted before: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/th...gh-altitude-penetrator-thap.7040/#post-512221

I am "patiently" waiting (2 years now) for it to complete review and release.

Balloon-borne jammers give you some idea of the degree of stealth they expected THAP to have.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Balloon-borne jammers give you some idea of the degree of stealth they expected THAP to have.

Were 1970s jammers smart enough to not scream "there's something in this area, put a box barrage of SA-5 Galosh nukes here"?