MIRVED Blue Streak?

[Spark]

MIRVED Blue Streak?


Some years ago when talking to three key people who worked on Chevaline about declassified aspects of the programme my question was anticipated when they all grinned and said “Yes, Blue Streak could, (have been Mirved) it would have been easy” Then would not elaborate.
What I was not aware off at the time was that the evolving Blue Streak with the “one megaton H-Bomb” design became so small by 1958 that it was suggested in Government archived documents that with range limited to 2,500n.miles three additional identical inert rounds could be included as “clone” decoys. This if it was under study in 1959 would make it early.
Has any one else seen anything about this aspect of the programme?

 

[CaseyKnight]

I assume the MIRV aspect would have come after the first missiles were to come online since, while the Polaris had the ability to carry 3 warheads: They were not independently targetable (all were deployed in the same general area).

While I can't rule out that the British could have gotten around this problem off the bat, I'd figure you'd need a fairly sophisticated system to maneuver the payload bus and accurately pop-off each warhead accurately enough to land within a desirable distance (could be wrong tho)

 

[Yellow Palace]

The challenge of developing a MIRV bus was sufficient that by 1979, the UK believed that it could do so if required (i.e. if the US wouldn't export the technology), but that it would be so expensive that sticking with a MRV system similar to that developed for Chevaline would be more cost-effective.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The challenge of developing a MIRV bus was sufficient that by 1979, the UK believed that it could do so if required (i.e. if the US wouldn't export the technology), but that it would be so expensive that sticking with a MRV system similar to that developed for Chevaline would be more cost-effective.

If you need general wide area destruction, like for an air base (or city), MRVs are better than one large warhead. The Independently Targetable part is a technical challenge that the US didn't do until Poseidon.

 

[Zoo Tycoon]

The challenge of developing a MIRV bus was sufficient that by 1979, the UK believed that it could do so if required (i.e. if the US wouldn't export the technology), but that it would be so expensive that sticking with a MRV system similar to that developed for Chevaline would be more cost-effective.

Chevaline was not MRV in the same way as Polaris but also not MIRV in the way that’s commonly understood today. Chevaline’s bus (with the two nasties) was manoeuvrable and could aim/release these at two different targets, although it’s purpose was to create a threat cloud of decoys and real. All that said the one sub load out was highly optimised for a guaranteed hits on a small number of the most strategic targets rather than inflicting country area sized devastation.

Even Chevaline needed US packaged hydrazine thruster technology which was cleared for export at the highest levels.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Chevaline was not MRV in the same way as Polaris but also not MIRV in the way that’s commonly understood today. Chevaline’s bus (with the two nasties) was manoeuvrable and could aim/release these at two different targets, although it’s purpose was to create a threat cloud of decoys and real. All that said the one sub load out was highly optimised for a guaranteed hits on a small number of the most strategic targets rather than inflicting country area sized devastation.

Even Chevaline needed US packaged hydrazine thruster technology which was cleared for export at the highest levels.

Being able to point the two warheads at different targets is definitely MIRV by definition.

Of course, my favorite part of MIRV tech is "what do you do with the bus once it's empty? Oh, you drop that from 1,000km up as an insult to injury."