A lot of technology out of Navaho was used for other applications.

Well the rocket-motors used in the launch booster were updated and used in the Atlas, Jupiter and Thor ballistic missiles IIRC.

On another note given how many launch failures this missile had it earned the unfortunate nickname "Nevergo Navaho";):D. Did it ever have a successful test-flight before the programme was cancelled?
 
What was the video about, sferrin? Maybe I could a new version of it on YT if I knew what it was about.
I've taken a look for the old URL on archive.org
Code:
https://web.archive.org/web/20151013063602/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1bVf7OLe0s&gl=US&hl=en
Using Ruffle (apparently it was old flash Youtube ?), i saw that it was "Project MX-770 News Report No.9"

Archive.org have a copy of the video here
It was also re-uploaded on Youtube at least twice.
This one appears longer because it restart but seem to be good quality
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQssbUqBNmE

And this one edited at the right duration but lower quality (re-up?)
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSSndSepC2E

PS : I don't know how to avoid the media parser so i used a code block, otherwise it'll show the dead Youtube link. If there is a better way, moderators feel free to edit my post.
 
Last edited:
all failed
As with many early missile programs, Navaho had its share of problems and failures, and indeed most flights ended in failures. At the same time (1957) as the last Navaho flights, only 4 out of the 8 test flights of Atlas A (a test version with only the two outer engines, and lacking the center sustainer engine) were successful. Navaho had to deal with failures in two separate and very different vehicles, a liquid fuel rocket and a dual ramjet cruise missile. As well as the aerodynamics of successful separation of the booster and cruise missile at Mach 3+.

When the program was cancelled, the remaining 5 rocket boosters and G-26 ramjet cruise missile vehicles were allowed to be expended in test flights in the "Fly Five" program. While none were a total success, one flight in July 1957, employed a G-26 vehicle (54-30950) and rocket booster 10. The rocket booster got the G-26 up to 77,000 feet and Mach 3.5. The G-26 successfully separated and flew at Mach 3 for 15 minutes and 450 miles. A right turn occurred and ground control took over, but one of the ramjets lost thrust due to air flow disruptions of the turn. A partial success.

An even more extensive flight in September of 1957 with G-26 vehicle 9 (54-3098) and rocket booster 013 was also a partial success. The rocket was launched and the G-26 separated from the booster at 73,000 feet and Mach 3.15. The G-26 covered 1075 miles at Mach 2.8. After 40 minutes, the N6 guidance system began a preprogrammed turn back toward Cape Canaveral. Radar indicated the G-26 was not turning fast enough, so ground control took over and increased the turning rate. The steeper turn disrupted air flow to the right ramjet engine.

None of the flights (carried out after the program had been cancelled) were total successes, but some achieved several milestones that the program was striving for.
 
Last edited:
With Navaho, not only were new systems used for the first time, but also production processes were developed that later became standard, structures for hulls were developed, new materials and alloys and much more. Navaho significantly advanced aviation without being successful itself.
 
When the program was cancelled, the remaining 5 rocket boosters and G-26 ramjet cruise missile vehicles were allowed to be expended in test flights in the "Fly Five" program. While none were a total success, one flight in July 1957, employed a G-26 vehicle (54-30950) and rocket booster 10. The rocket booster got the G-26 up to 77,000 feet and Mach 3.5. The G-26 successfully separated and flew at Mach 3 for 15 minutes and 450 miles. A right turn occurred and ground control took over, but one of the ramjets lost thrust due to air flow disruptions of the turn. A partial success.

An even more extensive flight in September of 1957 with G-26 vehicle 9 (54-3098) and rocket booster 013 was also a partial success. The rocket was launched and the G-26 separated from the booster at 73,000 feet and Mach 3.15. The G-26 covered 1075 miles at Mach 2.8. After 40 minutes, the N6 guidance system began a preprogrammed turn back toward Cape Canaveral. Radar indicated the G-26 was not turning fast enough, so ground control took over and increased the turning rate. The steeper turn disrupted air flow to the right ramjet engine.

So those last few test-flights would've been qualified successes?
 
no, didn't finish flight profile.
Hence partial. The full flight wasn't completed, but a significant proportion thereof was, and the reasons for failure to complete the flight were understood. For test flights, that's a reasonable definition of partial success.

It's interesting that in both cases ground control took over, airflow was disrupted during a turn, one engine lost thrust, and the vehicle was lost. That's suggestive to me of something that could have been resolved by (a) modified intake design, and (b) better defining the flight envelope.
 
Don´t forget that, in 1957, inertial roll coupling had just been encountered by the X program 12 months earlier (X-2 pilot Apt killed at Mach 3,2). It wouldn't be surprising if all the knowledge hadn´t been assimilated then, especially by the flight control law team that had to finalize their work prior to that incident.
 
Last edited:
Given the technical challenges, Navaho was envisioned to develop in three stages. Tthe first stage was the X-10 with turbojets to test the aerodynamics of the cruise missile design. These flew both at Edwards AFB and Cape Canaveral under remote control, and had landing gear for reuse. The second stage was the two engine rocket booster with the G-26 cruise missile. This was the stage that the program was at when it was cancelled. The final "Fly Five" flights were in the second stage of the Navaho program, employing the G-26 cruise missile and a 2 liquid engine rocket boosters, each with 120,000 lbs. of thrust. They were intended to test designs and requirements, such as successful separations at Mach 3 speed for ramjet operation. The G-26 was not intended to be the final 5,500 nautical mile, Mach 3.2 design proposed by North American. So the G-26 flight profiles were developmental test flights, never intended to be full range flights.

The planned operational design was the third stage, the G-38, which had a larger ramjet cruise missile (87.3 feet vs. G-26 67.9 length, 40.2 wingspan vs. 28.7 in the G-26, and the G-38 weighed 120,500 lbs. vs. 65,000 in the G-26). The G-38 operational version booster was planned to have three liquid rocket engines with a 90 foot length and a 7'8" diameter ( in contrast, the G-26 rocket booster was 76 feet long and 5'10" diameter with 2 rocket engines). This upgraded engine trio were slated to produce 400,000 lbs of thrust. In both the operational G-26 and G-38 design, the rocket engines were Rocketdyne LR-83 (upgraded in the G-38). The G-38 cruise missile design had twin Wright RJ-47 ramjets (with thrust upgraded from 15,000 to 20,000 lbs. of thrust each).

The G-38 cruise missile was the design that was intended to deliver the full 5,500 nautical mile range at Mach 3.2 and 70,000 feet altitude. Unlike the G-26, the G-38 cruise missile design had a single vertical tail and independently moving canards. It had been designed to carry the initial, heavy hydrogen fusion weapons (10,000 lbs. payload). It was planned to have the N6B inertial navigation system featuring transistors and etched circuit boards. And a derivative of this system served as the basis for the Polaris submarine SINS, as mentioned.

The rapid development of both intermediate range and intercontinental range missiles, along with the rather quick arrival of lighter weight fusion weapons, made the Navaho program redundant. In case of war, it would be slower in delivering weapons than the developing Atlas ICBM. And the simultaneous 1950's development programs of Thor, Polaris A-1, and Jupiter IRBMs choked competing programs of funds (e.g., Navaho, Regulus II, Triton). As well, to fly for extended periods at Mach 3+, the G-38 would have required extensive use of rare and expensive titanium for the body and wings. When the program was started in the late 1940's, few anticipated that in a decade, operational IRBMs and ICBMs would become viable. Navaho was continued in the first half of the 1950's as a hedge against unforeseen issues with ICBMs. But by the time the 2nd phase G-26 was underway, it was apparent that Navaho was no longer needed. The G-38 only got as far as the design board.
 

Attachments

  • Navaho G-26.jpg
    Navaho G-26.jpg
    162.6 KB · Views: 21
  • Navaho G-38 Drawing.jpg
    Navaho G-38 Drawing.jpg
    141.5 KB · Views: 19
  • G-38 in flight drawing.jpg
    G-38 in flight drawing.jpg
    816.1 KB · Views: 20
  • G-38 model.jpg
    G-38 model.jpg
    389.2 KB · Views: 21
  • G-38 & booster model.jpg
    G-38 & booster model.jpg
    256.5 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom