Titan 1 Information Request

Well, wikipedia says 1800 lb to LEO. Which makes sense. Its warhead was the AVCO Mk 4 which the FAS says was 3080 lb. If Titan I was a true global missile then the orbital payload would be ~2900 lb. Now if Titan I was made to ONLY attack the USSR which requires a less than global trajectory delta V then, 1800 lb to orbit makes sense.

Man, we're digging deep.

If you believe Wikipedia it could put 1800 lbs into LEO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_I

But I am not able to find any reference for that figure elsewhere.

Astronautix discusses it in detail, including its use for the X-20, but does give any orbital payload figures.

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/titan.htm

1800 pounds sounds too low, since an Atlas D could and did orbit 3000 pounds (Mercury).

Museums are a great resource. Have you tried calling some of them? Someone there may be able to give you more information than you ever dreamed of or direct you to relevant documents or contacts. There are the big names, Smithsonian, etc. and some smaller ones. The Estrella warbirds museum claims they have a Titan I. http://www.ewarbirds.org/ And Vandenberg AFB has the Space & Missile Heritage Center.

The following link (page I14) http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19780071276_1978071276.pdf
gives 3760 lbs as the payload to a 300 nm orbit, using a small apogee kick motor to circularize the initial 50 by 300 nm orbit.

A while back, Gary Hudson's company HMX tried to get funding to use retired Titan 2 ICBMs for ISS cargo flights.

http://www.hobbyspace.com/AAdmin/archive/Interviews/Systems/GaryHudson.html

I remember reading more about this, but I can't find it quickly.

Titan 2 was used for Gemini launches, with weight of 8500 pounds, so 1800 pounds to orbit for Titan 1 sounds low. Titan 2 used storable hydrazine and nitrogen tetroxide, while Titan 1 used LOX and kerosine. I think that generally storables give lower performance than LOX and kerosine, but there could be other significant differences between Titan 1 and 2.

If the effort is going to be invested into moving the Titan I, why not move it up the road to the Hiller Aviation Museum? And, what will happen with the Shuttle WT model?

Dyna-Soar was slated to fly on the Titan III-C with solid strap-ons (but of course was cancelled before the Titan III-C flew); in fact, Titan III-C was conceived in part for Dyna-Soar since Titan I (really only a backup for Atlas; parts of it made it into the Titan II) couldn't lift DS. Best "general" source I'm aware of is AIAA's International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems by Isakowitz, Hopkins, and Hopkins. Nice histories of all the different launch vehicles, actually. The earliest payload capacity they list, however, is for the Titan II/Gemini: 3600 kg to 185 km, or 7900 lb to 100 nmi (28.5 incl).
David Baker's History of Manned Space Flight has some good stuff, too.

That reference was great. Thanks!

About Dyna Soar

Just search for appropriate back issues of Aviation Week. This might take some doing because it's "awhile back". Probably not finable via google. As is their custom, they ran occasional articles on this topic as major events happened.

Paul Margosian

I have a program for an HP48G programable, which puts a LV either into LEO or to escape. There is enough data on Encyclopedia Astronautica vehicle wise, to configure a trajectory and payload. I'll start with launching from the Cape to a 100n.m orbit. Be a day or two - VERY slow processor!

Ha! just went over to EA site for data upload and found an article in the section on the Titan family about a variant called Titan C. This was a Titan 1 with a Hydrolox upper stage capable of orbiting the Dynasoar: the article also talked about using a Saturn 1 launcher for the same purpose. The Dynasoar had a dry weight of 5,500kg/12,125lbs. Titan 1 gave way to Titan II in the ICBM stakes because of utilizing "storable" propellants. But, one thing that was mentioned, was the conversion of the Aerojet LR-78,87&91 engines to use Hydrolox propellants:successfully too! Resurrection time!?! GO Aerojet!

I knew I shouldn't bloviate without consulting my references! Sorry for the posted ignorance; even the 2nd reference I mention describes how Dyna-soar's intended booster went up the scale from Titan I to Titan III-C. Fascinating how they so grossly underestimated the weight for a winged vehicle like that.

So, what's the GLOW for the X-37?

Okay ran the program. With 10% residuals, a basic Titan 1 will just put 3000lbs into a 100statute mile orbit. I see why they didn't bother with it. Almost no "stretch IMO.