Jump to content

Talk:LGM-25C Titan II: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
one lump or wo
Geomartin (talk | contribs)
Line 52: Line 52:


The [[LR-87]] used in the first stage is a single engine with two nozzles. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] ([[User talk:Andrewa|talk]]) 18:19, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
The [[LR-87]] used in the first stage is a single engine with two nozzles. [[User:Andrewa|Andrewa]] ([[User talk:Andrewa|talk]]) 18:19, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
:That is not correct, the LR-87-5 was a single chamber engine, which was fitted as a pair on the Titan II first stage. That is in contrast to the LR-87-3 of the Titan I, which was a two chamber engine with shared turbo-pump comparable to the modern [[RD-180]].[[User:Geomartin|Geomartin]] ([[User talk:Geomartin|talk]]) 11:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:01, 25 November 2012


Deployment Numbers

The deployment numbers cannot be correct. There were 54 silos at the 3 operational bases plus three training complexes with one missile each at Vandenberg temporarly on alert, so the maximum number of deployed missiles is 57 at any given time.Geomartin (talk) 08:45, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gov't Report

The text on the www.fas.org about the Titan II missile is not copyrighted material. It comes from page 233 of the U.S. Government report:

"To Defend and Deter: Legacy of the United States Cold War Missile Program" - 1996

by John C. Lonnquest and David F. Winkler USACERL Special Report 97/01 A study sponsored by the Department of Defense Legacy Resource Management Program Cold War Project 607 pages - illustrated

70.95-mb PDF format

The report is available at this URL.

http://www.cevp.com/docs/COLDWAR/1996-11-01952.pdf

Compare the Titan II section starting on page 233.

USAF Titan II Fact Sheet

Rusty 03:16, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Titan II range

Titan II, as deployed, had a range of 5,500 nautical miles, not 9,000 miles. At one time the thought to deploy the Titan I Mark IV RV and warhead generated one flight that failed at staging and this is likely the source of the 9,000 mile range. The deployed Titan II had the W-53 and Mark VI RV, as correctly stated in the article.

Sources:

<"WS 107C, Titan II Weapon System Final Report, January 1965," held at the History Office, Peterson AFB, Colorado Springs,classified SECRET. The information cited is not classified.>/ <"Detailed Design Specifications for Model SM-68B Missile, Including Addendum for XSM-68B," held at History Office, Peterson AFB, unclassified.> 206.128.65.121 (talk) 02:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of fatal accident in Searcy Arkansas silo

| Source--Senor Freebie (talk) 11:50, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to do so. Ckruschke (talk) 00:07, 16 March 2012 (UTC)Ckruschke[reply]

One lump or two

The LR-87 used in the first stage is a single engine with two nozzles. Andrewa (talk) 18:19, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That is not correct, the LR-87-5 was a single chamber engine, which was fitted as a pair on the Titan II first stage. That is in contrast to the LR-87-3 of the Titan I, which was a two chamber engine with shared turbo-pump comparable to the modern RD-180.Geomartin (talk) 11:01, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]