How pointy Minuteman III does not burn

[kerbiloid]

Probably, this mockup is as common with reality, as a hydrogen bomb scheme in a schoolbook, though.

[p1t1o]

They *definitely* go in "pointy" end down, 100% no doubt about it. If you look at how the shape of RVs changed over time, it exactly follows the progress made in hypersonics aerodynamics and heatshield technology. From photos and video of re-entering RVs you can see that they come in FAST and white-hot, in fact the curve of their trajectory is so shallow as to be almost invisible to the eye, that is how fast. This necessarily dictates a very small half-angle and a very small nose radius, ie: a sharp cone.

 

 

They are/can be spin stabilised, but only to several RPM, this is not to hold attitude in atmosphere, but when they are released they must be placed into the correct re-entry attitude, the spin keep them stable until they enter. 

The internals of nuclear RVs are obviously classified, but it isnt' hard to imagine that the centre-of-mass can be easily engineered to be in the proper place for aerodynamic stability.

The sorts of temperatures and heat impulses they endure are easily handled by ablative shielding, as others have stated, they only have to endure it for a minute or two.

[kerbiloid]

Of course, they go down with pointy end. That's why Pershing has tail fins on the wide one.

Also Titan 2

http://www.fluidr.com/photos/rocbolt/8429419830

Edited June 10, 2016 by kerbiloid

[DDE]

22 hours ago, kerbiloid said:

Probably, this mockup is as common with reality, as a hydrogen bomb scheme in a schoolbook, though.

Nope. Because of a treason case involving some Chinese, this particular scheme, which also deviates from the textbook design, was actually declassified and widely corroborated.

[kerbiloid]

1 hour ago, DDE said:

Nope. Because of a treason case involving some Chinese, this particular scheme, which also deviates from the textbook design, was actually declassified and widely corroborated.

Arrow 2 points at least one fake place.

Arrow4 at another.

Edited June 10, 2016 by kerbiloid

[monophonic]

On Friday, June 10, 2016 at 7:19 PM, kerbiloid said:

Arrow 2 points at least one fake place.

Arrow4 at another.

Well yeah, "all-fissile fusion boosted" is an oxymoron, and Fogbank is probably equally close to plastic foam as it is to toothpaste. But for the topic of this thread, which is warhead aerodynamics, that pic is good enough.

[DDE]

15 hours ago, monophonic said:

Well yeah, "all-fissile fusion boosted" is an oxymoron, and Fogbank is probably equally close to plastic foam as it is to toothpaste. But for the topic of this thread, which is warhead aerodynamics, that pic is good enough.

Guys, seriously, what do you expect of the mainstream media? You're lucky they didn't try to depict the weapon components as glowing!

[kerbiloid]

On 11.06.2016 at 7:41 PM, monophonic said:

But for the topic of this thread, which is warhead aerodynamics, that pic is good enough.

If  they are not, say, upside down or so. Or if their relative sizes are not completely an artist's view.

Edited June 13, 2016 by kerbiloid

[kerbiloid]

http://fas.org/blogs/security/2007/08/us_tripples_submarine_warhead/

 

Edited June 13, 2016 by kerbiloid

[Gauga159]

Logical stuff heat shields and center of mass balances