Bristol Bloodhound

[general melchett]

Hi there ,this is my first time posting so please go easy on me! I was wondering if any of you knowlegable folks know the correct colour scheme for the bloodhound mark 1's in the early part of their careers as v-bomber base SAGW as I am doing a small diorama using the Airfix kit and a Valiant and am a bit suspicious of their colours. Were the boosters really yellow or is that a bit of artistic license ( or test markings) from our friends at Marfleet? as all the pics I have found point to them being white ( this is the early version not the later green ones). also did they have small roundels on the body? Thanks for any help with this.

Andy..

[AnonymousER99]

Not sure but this is what my Bloodhound looks like!

Sorry but couldn't resist!!

[entlim]

Nice mutt Mike.............

[general melchett]

Thanks for that! look's like he could do with a couple of rocket boosters to get him going bless him.

Andy...

[hatchet]

Andy!

A quick search on yielded this picture of a 141sqn Bloodhound. No visible roundels, but a sqn marking on the white booster.

HTH

[general melchett]

Thanks Martin , My God it looks like a giant firework Wonder if it was all dressed up for a party? ground crew look pleased with it...

Andy..

[Richard M]

This image of a bloodhound slung under a Belvedere has the yellow boosters, no idea if it is a warshot.

This image, although black and white shows the boosters to be a different colour from the main body, yellow?

Best

Rich

[general melchett]

Cheers Rich I think you could be right ,looking at the contrast / tone in the pic there's a good chance it may well be yellow.Interesting arrangement of covers on the thors.That first shot must be of the worlds fastest microlight

Andy...

Edited April 14, 2008 by general melchett

[Barrovian]

There is a complete Bloodhound at the RAF Museum at Cosford, don't know if you can get something off their website

[AnonymousDFB1]

Andy.

Didn't Airfix do a kit of a bloodhound with a landrover and crew? I even remember a figure of and snowdrop with a dog! Think I even built the kit when I was a wee one.

Not a lot of help sorry

[Richard M]

They do indeed Mish, it's this kit that Andy is asking about. I made it a while ago, resplendent in the yellow and white scheme.

Best

Rich

[Obi-Jiff Kenobi]

Nice, Rich. Very well finished.

[AnonymousDFB1]

yes that the one, wish I still had mine, probably got glue fingermarks all over it

Edited April 15, 2008 by Mish

[thx6667]

I have some walk-around pics I took of one in... Wells Reclamation Yard! I think the tyre marks are still there where I was driving past and thought "hills, fields, Bloodhound missile.."

If you want pics I can email them.

Edited April 15, 2008 by Jonathan Mock

[Dave Fleming]

Wrong mark (a mk 2 dummy) but I like thsi one!

Anyone know the difference between a mk 1 and a mk 2 from a modelling point?

[Andy Mullen]

There is also Mk2 at Duxford

[general melchett]

Thanks everyone ,That's a great looking model Rich pretty well what I want to do with mine ,hopefully have it done for the bomber command SIG at Telford. The main difference between the mk 1 and 2 apparantly was the fitting of an upgraded pulsed radar and homing unit ,the original being easily jammed and vulnerable to ground clutter other than that it looked the same. Tony Buttlers brilliant Secret Projects book on,ramjets ,hypersonics and missiles covers it's development well but only has black and white photos so it's hard to get an idea of colour schemes and nothing is mentioned in the text.

Andy..

[Barrovian]

Flightpath make a 1/32 Scale version, pictures of a complete one here

http://home.clara.net/djparkins/customer/c...bloodhound2.htm

http://home.clara.net/djparkins/customer/c...bloodhound1.htm

http://home.clara.net/djparkins/fltpath/fpmaster.htm

[tjn]

your dog looks ace mike.

[bigVern1966]

I know its is an old thread, but Correct Bloodhound Mk 1 Colours.

Radome - an Orange / Tan on early Missiles, Gloss Black on later ones (some had a thin silver band at the Ramjet / Forebody joint).

Overall Missile and Boosters - Gloss White, Stencilling and markings Black with a thin red 'Live' band on the boost motors just behind the forward boost mount.

Ramjet Shock Cone and Aux Air Intake on stub wing under it - Silver (though covered by a conical fibreglass weather cover when on the launcher or silver end plates which were part of the packing the ramjet came in from the factory).

Boost motor Rocket nozzles - A metallic reddish brown.

Operational rounds did not carry roundels or fin flashs, however at least 2 Sqns (222 and 264) did have at least one operational missile with a roundel flanked by sqn bars on the upper ramjet.

http://www.iwmcollections.org.uk/media/ima...AF_T_002703.jpg

Link to the best colour photo I've found above, but I do have a few B/W ones, Plus the Missile at Wells does have most of the correct Stencil data (except for the boosts). The photo in the link did have all of the stencil data on it, but I've got my hands on a large copy of the photo from the IWM photo collection, and unfortunatly the censor had attacked the photo with an airbrush / scratched the negitive over most of missile and booster stencilling).

There were Yellow Boosts about (and some black ones), but they were fitted to test firing rounds or were dummys for display purposes.

(edited for change of info)

Edited January 26, 2010 by bigVern1966

[bigVern1966]

Thanks everyone ,That's a great looking model Rich pretty well what I want to do with mine ,hopefully have it done for the bomber command SIG at Telford. The main difference between the mk 1 and 2 apparantly was the fitting of an upgraded pulsed radar and homing unit ,the original being easily jammed and vulnerable to ground clutter other than that it looked the same. Tony Buttlers brilliant Secret Projects book on,ramjets ,hypersonics and missiles covers it's development well but only has black and white photos so it's hard to get an idea of colour schemes and nothing is mentioned in the text.

Andy..

Except for minor Hydraulic components, there were no common parts between the two versions of the missile.

Front to back.

Mk 1 Electronics almost completely Thermonic Valve with a few Transistors, Missile electrical power generated by a Hydraulic powered Alternator mounted with the electronics at the front end. Missile homed on to the target using a Pulse Radar system directly after the Boosters came off. Missile could not re-acquire the target if it loss radar lock.

Mk 2 Electronics almost completely Transistors (with a few Radio Frequency Valves), Missile power generated by a Thermal Battery at the rear of the missile. Missile homed on to Doppler Shift of the target using a CW Radar System, which could reacquire the target if it lost lock (Mk 1 missile couldn't). Bigger radar dish than a Mk 1. Guidance system also had a Climb/Cruise trajectory control system in it, which got the missile up to high altitude as quickly as possible and kept it there (reducing drag and fuel burn), thus extending the range. The missile still tracked the target in bearing, until a Terminal homing command, allowed it to climb/dive on to the target.

Mk 1 Warhead and Fuze. 200lbs Blast Warhead with a CW radar proximity fuse.

Mk 2 Warhead and Fuze. 395lbs Continuous Rod Warhead (77lbs HE shaped charge, surrounded with 365 steel rods, welded in such a way that if formed a hoop of steel 185 feet across when the warhead detonated which would cut a Russian Bomber in half literally), pulse radar proximity fuse with much better ECCM circuits.

Mk 1 Fuel load 41 Gallons (Max powered range 28 Miles at Mach 2.2)

Mk 2 Fuel Load 52 Gallons (Max powered range 100 Miles at Mach 2.7), Improved fuel control system that dealt with the Thor 100's tendency to flame out if the missile had to do a hard manoeuvre

Mk 1 Engines - 2 x Thor 100 Series Ramjets (around 4500 pounds of thrust) based on a Boeing Bristol design. 4x Gosling 3 boost motors (around 450lbs of rocket propellant in each motor, burnt out at Mach 1.8). Limited Throttleable

Mk 2 Engines - 2 x Thor 200 Series Ramjets (around 5000 pounds of thrust) based on a NGTE design. 4x Gosling 4 boost motors (longer and larger diameter than Gosling 3, with around 550lbs of rocket propellant in each motor, burnt out at Mach 2.2 in the same burn time as the Gosling 3). Fully Throttleable. Enlarged exhaust nozzle with improved cooling.

Mk 1 Wings - Light Alloy wing spigots

Mk 2 Wings - Steel wing spigots (Early Mk 2's had light Alloy spigots, and kept ripping the wings off at launch due to the massive increase in acceleration due to the more powerful boosts). Bigger wings and Tail Fins.

Mk 2 Hydraulics system was upgraded with an Oil Cooler, which made the Hydraulics more efficient, plus a redesigned turbopump.

Mk 1 system was very fixed site.

Mk 2 system was transportable and only needed a flat piece of ground to deploy to.

Mk2 was longer, heavier, faster, had much longer range, more effective warhead, much less susceptible to ECM, much greater engagement envelope, was deployable and the complete missile system could search for and engage targets without outside help as the radar could search for targets, which the Mk 1’s ground based radar coundn't. Plus Digital Computer in the Launch Control Post, which speeded engagement times up.

Edited January 21, 2010 by bigVern1966

[Devilfish]

Mk2 was longer, heavier, faster, had much longer range, more effective warhead, much less susceptible to ECM, much greater engagement envelope, was deployable and the complete missile system could search for and engage targets without outside help as the radar could search for targets, which the Mk 1’s ground based radar coundn't. Plus Digital Computer in the Launch Control Post, which speeded engagement times up.

The way I remember it, the Mk2 was much less susceptible to ECM, as long as it was known about and "programmed in" before launch.

The Mk2, like the Mk1, was guided onto target by a ground station (type 86 or type 87 radar), so I don't understand what you mean by "could search for and engage targets without outside help as the radar could search for targets", as the receiver on the missile was exactly that, only a receiver...?

[bigVern1966]

The way I remember it, the Mk2 was much less susceptible to ECM, as long as it was known about and "programmed in" before launch.

The Mk2, like the Mk1, was guided onto target by a ground station (type 86 or type 87 radar), so I don't understand what you mean by "could search for and engage targets without outside help as the radar could search for targets", as the receiver on the missile was exactly that, only a receiver...?

Very OT

The System was a bit more than just the Missile. The Mk 1 Target Illumination Radar (TIR) was the Type 83, it had no built in search facilities for finding targets without information provide by other surveillance radars, The TIR’s (Type 86 and 87) used with the Mark 2 could be used as surveillance radars in their own right (and in fact they would have been used as such after all of the missiles had been fired had WWIII kicked off), as they both could search quite large areas of sky for their own targets automaticly without the help of other ground based sensors, like the big radars at places like Neatishead. The way this was used was that a Bloodhound missile section may have been given a patch of sky to defend and that it was to work in autonomous mode (say the ground based radars controlling its operation had gone u/s or had been taken out by an attack) . In that mode of operation, the TIR could search that area and any aircraft detected would be tracked. If the aircraft wasn’t flying within a designated ‘safe lane’ at the correct altitude and speed (as the TIR wasn't fitted with IFF), it would have been considered hostile and engaged.

As for the ECM, the Mark 2 had a number of anti ECM tricks up it’s selves that the Mk 1 didn’t besides the one that was switched on or off while the missile was on the ground. Mk 1's biggest problem was that if it lost lock on either receiver channel in flight it couldn’t re-acquire lock automatically, The Mk 2 could.

Edited January 22, 2010 by bigVern1966

[PhantomMJI]

This is a great thread thanks for posting the details on the Bloodhound. We do not come across this missile too often on this side of the pond and my only opportunity to see one in the flesh (er... metal) was at Hendon a few years back. I do have a question in regards to model kits of this cool missile. In addition to the Airfix and Flightpath versions already mentioned, does anyone know who did the original molds for the Marcos Miniature Bloodhound kit? This is a resin kit and is in 1/48 scale. I have a copy in my stash but have rarely ever seen this kit mentioned. When I first bought it I thought it was a copy of the Flightpath kit but then I realized it was in a different scale.

Have fun modeling!

Mike

[bigVern1966]

This is a great thread thanks for posting the details on the Bloodhound. We do not come across this missile too often on this side of the pond and my only opportunity to see one in the flesh (er... metal) was at Hendon a few years back. I do have a question in regards to model kits of this cool missile. In addition to the Airfix and Flightpath versions already mentioned, does anyone know who did the original molds for the Marcos Miniature Bloodhound kit? This is a resin kit and is in 1/48 scale. I have a copy in my stash but have rarely ever seen this kit mentioned. When I first bought it I thought it was a copy of the Flightpath kit but then I realized it was in a different scale.

Have fun modeling!

Mike

I've not seen the Marcos Miniature kit in the flesh, however there was a photo of Bloodhound model kicking around on the net that was 1-48 scale and it had some major errors on it (like features of both marks of missile on both the launcher and the missile itself). Any chance of some photos of your kit out of the box, and I can tell you what is wrong with it.