As a defense contractor for the US Air Force, I had a colleague that had worked on the Bomarc, a supersonic ramjet missile deployed in the late 1950s. It had a range of 700km, with a top speed of Mach 2.5.
From what I can find the Bomarc is a liquid fuel ramjet, not a solid fuel like in this video. If I understand the idea correctly you get a missile with solid fule that would be cheaper to build, require less maintenance, and simple to store then a liquid-fueled missile.
@@target844 Indeed, the switch to a technically much simpler and less expensive solid-fuel rocket motor design that combusts using only atmospheric oxygen from the ram-air inlet at the front is what's very innovative about Nammo's new devices. Personally, I find the Sprint ABM from the US's old Nike-X program in the 1960's to be the most impressive surface-to-air missile ever created in terms of raw performance. The system ended up being way too expensive and the Nike-X program was cancelled. But, I could see a new hybrid ram-air solid-fueled rocket like Nammo's concept being used today to start a new terminal-phase ground-based ABM missile program based around a much longer and more maneuverable hybrid ram-air solid-fueled rocket motor to finally make a more affordable and mass-production capable ABM missile shield for North America or Europe and Scandinavia. Sprint ABM: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprint_(missile)
@@metanumia Wow, I had no idea Nammo was testing solid fueled ramjet engines, I just assumed they were liquid fueled ramjets because I had no idea solid fueled ones even existed! Do you have any idea what kind of solid fuel they use, and how they make it suitable for combustion? And what do they use as an ignition source?
@@pieterveenders9793 I didn't know there was any solid that would burn fast enough in air to do that, but maybe there is. I wonder if they're adding some solid oxidiser and using the air as additional oxidiser. Or are they actually using liquid fuel for the ramjet stage and solid fuel for the rocket stage?
I'm an aerospace engineer and you are right THIS IS OLD TECHNOLOGY that is being re-birthed. This is the second of the videos I have watched. The other one was on their artillery shell that has a ramjet or what they call a ramjet as it should be classified as a ram rocket because they use solid fuel. This is mainly a PR video.
the germans use lots of flying bombs that had ramjet during ww2 that was named V-1 They sendt around 9521 against england 100 a day at the most! they weight more than 2000 kg each of which 800 kg was explosives.
@@RobertLutece909 my bad, im norwegian, google translate trickd me. hehe in norwegian both ram jets and pulse jets are just cald JET- ENGINES. I Guess if your a scientist you use different names. i know the difference though becouse i read a lot. a pure ram jet works best at mac3+ while a pulse jet works more like a 2 stroke engine. at any speed= explosion blowing out exhaust and then pause while it sucks in new oxygen.
The ramjet was conceived in 1913 by French inventor René Lorin, who was granted a patent for his device In 1915, Hungarian inventor Albert Fonó devised a solution for increasing the range of artillery, comprising a gun-launched projectile which was to be united with a ramjet propulsion unit In the Soviet Union, a theory of supersonic ramjet engines was presented in 1928 by Boris Stechkin. Yuri Pobedonostsev, chief of GIRD's 3rd Brigade, carried out a great deal of research into ramjet engines. The first engine, the GIRD-04, was designed by I.A. Merkulov and tested in April 1933 and so on
I'm an aerospace engineer and you are right THIS IS OLD TECHNOLOGY that is being re-birthed. This is the second of the videos I have watched. The other one was on their artillery shell that has a ramjet or what they call a ramjet as it should be classified as a ram rocket because they use solid fuel. This is mainly a PR video.
Meteor missile already exists and it is a game changer. the solid fuel ramjet was developed in germany many years ago and makes the Meteor an amazing long range air to air missile.
@@pieterveenders9793 in 1961 they already had 100 megaton bomb and detonated 50 megaton(which u can search and find) but in your head it can be read as 1 or 0.5 megatons as I understand, nice talking to u
A number of Surface to Air Missiles used Ramjet Propulsion example: RIM-8 TALOS (1958), CIM-10 BOMARC (1959), and UK's Bloodhound (1959). So using ramjets in missiles is not new. In this case the uses a solid fuel ramjet to greatly increase range by providing positive thrust, instead of base-bleed merely cutting the drag...
Bristol Bloodhound surface to air missile entered service with the RAF in 1958 and continued in service until the 1990's. It used rocket boosters to get the missile up to speed then the ramjets took over. I worked on the launchers as an apprentice in Bristol.
@@steel_yeet2989 Not at all, the Russians have fielded the P-270 and P-800 ramjet powered ASM for decades, they also helped India develop the Brahmos ASM which also uses ramjet propulsion. In the west a few nations also fielded ramjet powered missiles for decades. The earliest ramjet powered missiles appeared in the 1960's both in the west and east.
A valid point, however, this is the first time I have seen SOLID FUEL ramjets being developed for missile propulsion (I saw it once proposed for accelerating bullets). The early experiments cited in this thread and those above used LIQUID fuel.
The question remains how these rockets reach mach-3 speeds, in order for the ramjet to work. If a rocket motor is used in addition, the system will get more complex, and some of the improved fuel efficiency will be negated. If these are launched from aircraft or drones, and no rocket motor shall be used, these aircraft will have to fly much faster than current gen fighters.
The FIRST and largest US Navy ship-fired AA missile introduced around 1960, the TALOS, was ramjet-powered and, until better rocket fuels were introduced for higher speeds and uplink-controlled missile guidance allowed optimum high-altitude mid-trajectory flight (SM-2 and after, including Aegis), TALOS was the longest-range AA missile the US Navy had, thougn not the fastest and very bulky, so it needed very large ships and this finally caused it to be decommissioned.
LoL now it's the technology of Scramjet, Yeah. India is building BrahMos 2 missile with Scramjet Powered engine. Scramjet and Ramjet are identical but Scramjet is more effective.
@@1Maklak The ramjet was conceived in 1913 by French inventor René Lorin, who was granted a patent for his device In 1915, Hungarian inventor Albert Fonó devised a solution for increasing the range of artillery, comprising a gun-launched projectile which was to be united with a ramjet propulsion unit In the Soviet Union, a theory of supersonic ramjet engines was presented in 1928 by Boris Stechkin. Yuri Pobedonostsev, chief of GIRD's 3rd Brigade, carried out a great deal of research into ramjet engines. The first engine, the GIRD-04, was designed by I.A. Merkulov and tested in April 1933 and so on
Since it's solid fuel, perhaps the first part of the propellant also contains oxidized fuel. Think of it similar to the red igniter pad on an old school 155mm base charge.
To Nammo - the summary under the title states Jet engine invented in the 1040's instead of 1940's This is obviously a typo error. You may want to correct thus
The UK produced two ram jet boosted AGM missiles in the late 1950's the Thunderbird and the longer range Bloodhound. The Bloodhound particularly the MK2 version was highly regarded and only phased out of Swedish service in the early. 2000's
The SA-4, SA-6, Bomarc, Talos, Bloodhound and the Sea Dart were Ramjet powered Air Defence missiles. The Meteor is a current ramjet powered AAM. India is working on a ramjet powered Astra AAM. Moskit, Oniks, Brahmos, ASMP, Hsuing Feng -3, XASM-3 are ramjet powered strike missiles. So what's new about ramjet propulsion?
well yes that too... but if engine is turned on long time missile would be able to actually turn around and other funny tricks. so basically kill distance would be much greater
interesting stuff, kinda surprised this hasn't been apart of previous weapons systems since the concept of a ramjet and it's use is fairly old. Must be some progression in manufacturability that has made this cheaper or easier to make. but I suppose there are limits to it, like if launched from an aircraft the craft itself would have to be traveling at the operational speed for it to work otherwise it would need an additional stage to get the missile up to speed for the ram jet to work.
From what I've read, the major obstacle of development for ramjets became clear during extensive testing from the 50's to the 70's revealing that its operating speeds created temperatures that weren't survivable for any materials being used at the time. Hopefully with modern alloys and material development we'll soon be able to see the ramjet's true potential realized.
@@loganzacher9911 The British Thunderbird and Bloodhound missile systems both used ramjets. These were designed in the 50's and 60's and Bloodhound served until the early '90s in RAF service. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodhound_(missile)
@@richardprowse1088 oh wow I didn't realize that. I think what I read about ramjets was regarding their potential use in upper stage spacecraft which may be why they weren't able to build them to be durable/reusable enough for that application, but seeing that missiles are single use that would definitely make sense as to how they were able to make them work for that purpose despite not having materials strong enough to make them last beyond a single use or two
it was... P-800 Oniks for example and there are other older ones too. problem is that ram jet only starts to work above mach 1 so such missiles need 2 stages or at least starting booster to get to proper speed. also its not easy to make it proper shape for igniting propellant and keep that propellant burning
okay so don't you need the missile to already be moving for this to work in order to starting the mixing of the air and fuel i can see it working on an aircraft but how do you get initial take off.
The problem with high speed long range anti aircraft missiles is that they are easy to evade due to the laws of physics. Think of Bugs Bunny sidestepping a raging bull. The higher the speed difference, the harder the target is to hit. I suppose this is why the Meteor missile contains a restartable ramjet motor.
This missile likely wont be much faster than a conventional missile, but it will retain the launch speed for much much longer. Aircraft have strict G limits, and usually contains a pilot that has a limit as well, they cannot out turn a mach 3-5 missile that can often withstand G forces 3 times higher. Long range air to air missiles are usually defeated by letting them bleed velocity, something which will be far harder to do against a missile with effectively 5 more fuel
Steffen Nilsen You need to update yourself on the laws of physics. In order to out turn a fighter, a missile must sustain several hundred G. The slower the missile, the less G is needed.
It is actually opposite. The more kinetic energy a missile has, the larger the no escape zone is. The Meteor missile, for example, enlarges the NEZ by increasing speed just before impact. But how can this be when a fast-going object requires more force to turn? Yes, the plane can make sharper turns, but the distance traveled at a new angle is meaningless if the speed of the projectile is much greater. Consider a projectile from a gun hitting a running person. Sure, the person can turn, but it will not help him dodge because of the high speed of the bullet.
Some of what they say here is wishful thinking. It would be more truthful to compare a ramjet to a jet engine, they share more in common with these than rockets, despite basicaly being as simple as a flying stovepipe. Their efficiency starts out far, far, worse, but improves as speed increases, performing best at mach 2-3, and tapering off by mach 5 or so. But they should perform excelently in terms of stability. The fuels would be best compared to something like particularly enthusiastic candle wax. It is a solid, so does not disolve contaminants or pick up water like liquid fuels. Nor will it freeze or boil. They should also be less prone to degridation over time than rocket propellant. Oxidizer in rocket propellant and explosives wants to react with the fuel. This does happen even with a rocket just sitting in storage, just very slowly, leading to degredation of stability and other properties. I don't know how much of a problem this is, being just a aerospace hobbyist, but i imagine not having oxidizer would help the situation immensely. Plus, there are no bearings, seals or any other sort of mechanism you need to take careful care of. You should be able to put one of these things in a basic protective sleeve, and just leave it there for about forty years before you see any sort of issue. Best of luck with your blowing up of bad guys! Unless you're not NATO. In which case kindly become a democracy before reading this youtube comment.
@@Geolaminar that's the biggest thing, the fact that you dont need to maintain a missile like this means that a country can buy a tonne in bulk and save them for decades for potential war, not buy a few and shoot them before they expire, this is huge for logistics.
A lot of people point that ramjets are nothing new and it is true. The thing is that ramjets were mostly limited to large missiles like Bristol Bloodhound (2,2t) and RIM-8 Talos (3.5t). Soviets had some smaller ones like 2k12 KUB (600kg) but their range isn't that impressive. Rockets won (are more widely used) because they are simpler to design, control and deploy in field. You have your own oxidizer so you can control the burn more easily making a rocket easier to operate in wide range of weather conditions. With ramjets you need to take into account atmospheric conditions, because they take the oxidizer from the air. The thing is, that now we have much better computers both in macro and micro scale and this changes everything. We have powerful supercomputers with sophisticated fluid dynamic models so we can design simpler engines tuned to wider range of speeds and conditions. We also have incredibly fast and light computers and sensors that can control those engines in real time. Modern computers give us a big opportunity to make smaller, simpler and more reliable ramjets then before. Compare it to multi rotor drones and helicopters. Multi rotors are nothing new, a lot of the early helicopters were multi rotors like prototype of Sikorsky VS-300 (1940). What made modern multi rotors so successful is control systems. You do not need fancy mechanical blade pitch control if you have multiple propellers and can independently control their speeds fast enough. So we went from hard to pilot, expensive and impossible to miniaturize helicopters, to easy and cheap multi rotors, some of them size of a matchstick box and easy enough to be pilot by a 7 year old in their bedrooms.
The illustration showed 100% fuel. What gets the rocket up to speed? Surely an oxidizer is needed to get the rocket to speed before the ramjet works successfully???
Now i do feel safer. Its kind of odd nobody looked into ramjets before, because the concept is older than the modern jet engine. Ive seen guys make a pulsejet in high-school for their graduation project. We were 17 back then. I remember it needed a lot of initial air before it started properly. So they used a blower to get the engine running. But once it ran, it ran. It did make a lot of noise though. I bet that if you have enough air due to the high airspeed it will do its thing. No problem. The only thing is how do you convince a client? "Results dont lie" or so they say say..
There have been a number of ramje powered missiles. 2K11, 2K12, Bristol Bloodhound, BrahMos, Bomarc, Hsiung Feng III, Kh-31, MBDA ASMP, MBDA Meteor, P-270 Moskit, P-800 Oniks, RIM-8 Talos, Sea Dart, SM-64 Navaho. The MBDA Meteor was the first with a solid fuel ramjet.
The only problem is: Ramjets need to be accelerated to supersonic by a traditional rocket first, until they reach higher supersonic speeds. They are not very efficient yet.
I knew it! The "jet engine was invented in the 1040s," several decades before the Battle of Hastings. Which is why--as I've always said--William the Conqueror had F-14s, and the Normans won the battle, because with their old propeller-fighters, the English couldn't maintain air-superiority.... i know, it's a simple mistake. but i found it funny to imagine. I thought ramjets were already in our current missiles, I'm surprised that they aren't. i see in the comments many have mentioned working with ramjet missiles or rockets, since the 1950s.... so I'm a bit confused as to why they were not already standard.
Nothing new. The US Navy's Talos missile was a ramjet powered antiair weapon launched from a ship, and had a range of over 250 km (130 miles), and altitude ceiling of over 80,000 feet, and a speed of Mach 2.5.
Supersonic rockets with long range technologies, this is not bad, but we already are talking about hypersonic rockets developed by Russians and Chinese.
Ramjet is there since many years. Russian defence industries have been using this technology for a while. We Indians manged to develop the fastest antiship land attack cruise system which has an ability to be launched from air surface and submarines. This invention of yours is a truely a game changer Now the only challenge remains that is to make it even lighter. BRAMHOS NG will b tested for the 1st time in 2021-2022.
Aren't initiatially developed in USSR russian heavy P-800 Oniks, exported as Yakhont and licensed in India as Brahmos ramjet driven? Previous soviet generation Granit and following after Oniks - Alfa are also ramjets. And as far as I remember first in late 50s early 60s till 90s long range SAMs in USA, UK and USSR second stages were also ramjet driven. If I'm not mistaken in the USSR GIRD tested ramjet in the 30s before first prototype turbojets were tested in UK and Germany.
The problem is that that type of engine needs to be moving very fast before it can be lit. Something like 2 or 3 times the speed of sound. So it cant be lit from a stand still.
It becomes more efficient at supersonic speeds, but ramjets can be lit at Mach .5 and are reasonably efficient at speeds as low as just under the speed of sound (to accelerate to higher speeds), which is jet airliner speed and about the slowest (say) a fighter is going to be going in a situation in which it would contemplate firing a missile. ruclips.net/user/redirect?redir_token=J-OqxzlEuRp6dslES8lD71aIqrN8MTU5MTAxNTQ0NUAxNTkwOTI5MDQ1&stzid=UgzaCS724jboqrCwy0t4AaABAg.98yho_NSvfZ995_JpxUk5G&q=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRamjet&event=comments
The American have those during the cold war, talos missile uses a ram jet and have a range of 180km, but those aren't used anymore because Ramsey are far more complex than solid rocket motor.
That is the most game-changing technological innovation that I've seen in a very long time. That is absolutely brilliant. I am very proud to be descended from Norwegians. -Ariel Isaac Traasdahl #Ihaveahighschooleducation 💀♠️🎯
Definitely it needs the first stage launching engine, either the launching vessel has to move adequately fast. In reality it does not need all Mach3 for ramjet start working, however it is the optimal speed for the most effective functioning begin.
Except with stealth technology, how is an AA mobile radar going to track a target 500km away? The return signal will be too faint to track. The missile will have to have a sophisticated autonomous radar onboard. Distance from launch sight will be a problem.
@@sunshinecloudy Current generation missiles like the AIM-120C faired exceptionally well against countermeasures with a success rate of over ninety percent. I imagine the D variant improved upon that as would any modern missile. You seem to overestimate a search radars ability to pickup a target with an exceedingly low cross section.
On an airplane it's obvious, it already have enough speed. From the ground or a vehicle, a booster unit with a conventional rocket provide initial thrust.
I am sure the Ramjet can take the missiles further.But there is need for more powerful Radars and better guidance.I believe Indo Russia Joint venture Brahmos has both,apparently good for 500-600 kms.Russia has better missiles in Kalibr,S-400 and Zircon systems using scram Jet engines.
Biggest invention Since the jet engine? That may be true, but Its old technology, invented long time ago, and its being used by several other nations, nothing new here.
Atmospheric oxygen is only 21% of the air, and the density of the air diminishes with altitude. This puts a real constraint on the performance of the engine, and limits the operating parameters of the missile. Cruise Missiles in current use already use jet propulsion, as far back as the Nazi V-1.
Yeah, this is marketing BS, but a ramjet shouldn't be much more affected by this than a conventional jet engine. Less, actualy, since it's able to attain higher speeds (and potentialy compression ratios) right? Unless you're talking about the narrow performance window of a given fuel grain design.
Conveniently doesn’t address the problem with a ramjet missile, you have the get ramjets up to speed before they work. Such clear marketing bs without addressing fundamental limitations.
Yes. And as I said in one comment previously, they aren't even talking about G turns and speed retention, which is the thing that still make short air to air the best choice in a dogfight
booooooo misleading thumbnail, I was expecting a prototype launch. Think we all know it'd be amazing if it's able to be done effectively, the problem is doing it =D
They are saying speed and ranges, but nothing really about G turns those can pull. In a fight for aerial supremacy a fighter could just pull a S turn and make the missile go in a complete diffenece way. Not to mention the low speed retention a ramjet has compared to a rocket
Low speed retention? But you are right, ramjets can suffer from flameout if their intakes are starved. I do hear solid fueled ramjets recover particularly quickly, and the missile can still turn just fine even after flameout on inertia alone. Also, i am very suspicious of the idea that a sufficiently optimized intake would be starved of air simpily due to a high-gee turn. Ramjets have been tried as tipjets for helicopters, where forces exceeding 100G are sustained for hours at a time.
Wikipedia us wrong like most of the times. KUB doesn't have ramjet nor any liquid fueled engine. KUB has solid rocket motors for both stages one is booster other sustainer. S200 did have liquid fueled second stage most likely ramjet while s75 dvina had regular liquid fueled rocket engine .
Ramjet engine was patented in 1913. That's not something new. Bunch of rockets has used this technology. Even SR-71 engines worked as ramjet over 3 Mach.
The Meteor missile already have a restartable ramjet motor. The problem is still that the laws physics still apply. Remember when Bugs Bunny sidesteps the raging bull? That is what aircraft can do to fast moving missiles in BVR engagements as long as the aircraft have proper sensors. And we are down to single digit hit probabilities. If you add electronic warfare it becomes even worse. It is far cheaper to buy the aircraft from the pilot rather than try to shoot it down. If you really, really, really want to shoot down an aircraft you have to reduce the speed of the missile when it is close to the target to close the speed of the target. If you get behind the target, the missile can accelerate. The only other option is to have several missiles converging on the target from different directions.
As a defense contractor for the US Air Force, I had a colleague that had worked on the Bomarc, a supersonic ramjet missile deployed in the late 1950s. It had a range of 700km, with a top speed of Mach 2.5.
From what I can find the Bomarc is a liquid fuel ramjet, not a solid fuel like in this video. If I understand the idea correctly you get a missile with solid fule that would be cheaper to build, require less maintenance, and simple to store then a liquid-fueled missile.
@@target844 Indeed, the switch to a technically much simpler and less expensive solid-fuel rocket motor design that combusts using only atmospheric oxygen from the ram-air inlet at the front is what's very innovative about Nammo's new devices. Personally, I find the Sprint ABM from the US's old Nike-X program in the 1960's to be the most impressive surface-to-air missile ever created in terms of raw performance. The system ended up being way too expensive and the Nike-X program was cancelled. But, I could see a new hybrid ram-air solid-fueled rocket like Nammo's concept being used today to start a new terminal-phase ground-based ABM missile program based around a much longer and more maneuverable hybrid ram-air solid-fueled rocket motor to finally make a more affordable and mass-production capable ABM missile shield for North America or Europe and Scandinavia.
Sprint ABM: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprint_(missile)
@@metanumia Wow, I had no idea Nammo was testing solid fueled ramjet engines, I just assumed they were liquid fueled ramjets because I had no idea solid fueled ones even existed! Do you have any idea what kind of solid fuel they use, and how they make it suitable for combustion? And what do they use as an ignition source?
@@pieterveenders9793 I didn't know there was any solid that would burn fast enough in air to do that, but maybe there is. I wonder if they're adding some solid oxidiser and using the air as additional oxidiser. Or are they actually using liquid fuel for the ramjet stage and solid fuel for the rocket stage?
I'm an aerospace engineer and you are right THIS IS OLD TECHNOLOGY that is being re-birthed.
This is the second of the videos I have watched. The other one was on their artillery shell that has a ramjet or what they call a ramjet as it should be classified as a ram rocket because they use solid fuel.
This is mainly a PR video.
A ramjet missiles was used by the U.S. Navy starting in the late 50's . It was called Talos.
not at the same power as this one has this one could potentially carry war heads
@@paradox5087 Talos missiles were capable of delivering nuclear warheads.
Bendix produced the missile. Honeywell is the parent company now.
the germans use lots of flying bombs that had ramjet during ww2 that was named V-1 They sendt around 9521 against england 100 a day at the most!
they weight more than 2000 kg each of which 800 kg was explosives.
@@RobertLutece909 my bad, im norwegian, google translate trickd me. hehe
in norwegian both ram jets and pulse jets are just cald JET- ENGINES.
I Guess if your a scientist you use different names.
i know the difference though becouse i read a lot.
a pure ram jet works best at mac3+ while a pulse jet works more like a 2 stroke engine. at any speed=
explosion blowing out exhaust and then pause while it sucks in new oxygen.
The ramjet was conceived in 1913 by French inventor René Lorin, who was granted a patent for his device
In 1915, Hungarian inventor Albert Fonó devised a solution for increasing the range of artillery, comprising a gun-launched projectile which was to be united with a ramjet propulsion unit
In the Soviet Union, a theory of supersonic ramjet engines was presented in 1928 by Boris Stechkin. Yuri Pobedonostsev, chief of GIRD's 3rd Brigade, carried out a great deal of research into ramjet engines. The first engine, the GIRD-04, was designed by I.A. Merkulov and tested in April 1933
and so on
I'm an aerospace engineer and you are right THIS IS OLD TECHNOLOGY that is being re-birthed.
This is the second of the videos I have watched. The other one was on their artillery shell that has a ramjet or what they call a ramjet as it should be classified as a ram rocket because they use solid fuel.
This is mainly a PR video.
Mr. Moller seems like an adorable old man. Love his demure way of explaining things.
Are you a granny looking for some company? No doubt, most grannies would throw him some poontang.
As far as I remember RIM-8 Talos used ramjet in 1958.
A Ramjet is nothing new..but in this package it could be a gamechanger. Lets see.
gamechanger is Russian 200 megaton undetectable sleeping torpedo's aka radioactive 50 meter tsunami bombs, this is simple gameplay
Meteor missile already exists and it is a game changer. the solid fuel ramjet was developed in germany many years ago and makes the Meteor an amazing long range air to air missile.
@@Gabo_Gatchava Lol, you mean 2 megaton. Per usual the Russian propaganda has been downgraded and debunked.
@@pieterveenders9793 in 1961 they already had 100 megaton bomb and detonated 50 megaton(which u can search and find) but in your head it can be read as 1 or 0.5 megatons as I understand, nice talking to u
Love Nammo, one of the truly innovative and genuine companies I love!
who are you to gauge?
@@vyrsh0 I am the presidential advisor on gauges and godfathers
yeah... only 50+ years late lol
A number of Surface to Air Missiles used Ramjet Propulsion example: RIM-8 TALOS (1958), CIM-10 BOMARC (1959), and UK's Bloodhound (1959). So using ramjets in missiles is not new. In this case the uses a solid fuel ramjet to greatly increase range by providing positive thrust, instead of base-bleed merely cutting the drag...
Bristol Bloodhound surface to air missile entered service with the RAF in 1958 and continued in service until the 1990's. It used rocket boosters to get the missile up to speed then the ramjets took over. I worked on the launchers as an apprentice in Bristol.
The Soviets, Americans and a bunch of others had working ramjets decades ago, it shouldn't be presented as new technology.
for missiles is new
@@steel_yeet2989 Not at all, the Russians have fielded the P-270 and P-800 ramjet powered ASM for decades, they also helped India develop the Brahmos ASM which also uses ramjet propulsion. In the west a few nations also fielded ramjet powered missiles for decades. The earliest ramjet powered missiles appeared in the 1960's both in the west and east.
Remigijus Naucas don’t forget the European missile called Meteor
A valid point, however, this is the first time I have seen SOLID FUEL ramjets being developed for missile propulsion (I saw it once proposed for accelerating bullets). The early experiments cited in this thread and those above used LIQUID fuel.
@@digitalnomad9985 Ah I see, that's a good point!
The question remains how these rockets reach mach-3 speeds, in order for the ramjet to work. If a rocket motor is used in addition, the system will get more complex, and some of the improved fuel efficiency will be negated. If these are launched from aircraft or drones, and no rocket motor shall be used, these aircraft will have to fly much faster than current gen fighters.
if they use rockets for the inintal stage that stage will be just as eficient as a normal rocket ish.
they dont... ram jet starts working at mach 1,5 or something like that... oh by initial booster of course
The FIRST and largest US Navy ship-fired AA missile introduced around 1960, the TALOS, was ramjet-powered and, until better rocket fuels were introduced for higher speeds and uplink-controlled missile guidance allowed optimum high-altitude mid-trajectory flight (SM-2 and after, including Aegis), TALOS was the longest-range AA missile the US Navy had, thougn not the fastest and very bulky, so it needed very large ships and this finally caused it to be decommissioned.
It will go so fast and be so much better than the last generation missile that it should cause world peace and good will to all people.
Mike Johnston
Well... aren't you the Party Pooper?
Your optimism makes me sick!
General Patton would slap you silly.
Careful Chinese may have already bugged your systems to copy the technology.
Simple terms. SR 71 engine on a rocket
Not so complex, ram jets are far more simple.
SR71 uses a hybrid ram-turbo jet engine
LoL now it's the technology of Scramjet, Yeah. India is building BrahMos 2 missile with Scramjet Powered engine. Scramjet and Ramjet are identical but Scramjet is more effective.
Soon we'll see backpacks with ramjet propulsion
@@LeonardoRodriguez-ip4mx yeah, if we want to switch on or off the thrust whenever we want, there will be JetPacks, but with Ramjet propulsion only.
There's something about seeing a missle tear ass into the wild blue yonder. It's like "there he goes boys. Some poor bastard's very last bad day."
This comment thread is sharing a fascinating body of knowledge. Cheers!
I think these guys are friggen brilliant.
I cannot wait to meet them to assist me with a new project I have coming up in a few years!!
What??
best of luck with your project in the middle east
Ramjet engines was invented before the real jet engines
"the biggest invention since the introduction of the jet engine"
1st jet engine ever invented was a ramjet...
Pulsejet. It had one way valves at the air intake and worked in cycles. Ramjet has no valves and works continuously, but has to be faster to work.
That is true.
ruclips.net/video/E7SqSNQeAFM/видео.html
@@1Maklak The ramjet was conceived in 1913 by French inventor René Lorin, who was granted a patent for his device
In 1915, Hungarian inventor Albert Fonó devised a solution for increasing the range of artillery, comprising a gun-launched projectile which was to be united with a ramjet propulsion unit
In the Soviet Union, a theory of supersonic ramjet engines was presented in 1928 by Boris Stechkin. Yuri Pobedonostsev, chief of GIRD's 3rd Brigade, carried out a great deal of research into ramjet engines. The first engine, the GIRD-04, was designed by I.A. Merkulov and tested in April 1933
and so on
@@moreinzenjering6727 The hard task is to get them to work in practice.
@@olemann2832 That brought back memories from a long gone childhood. AND I even remembered the words. 😳
If it doesn't carry oxidizer, how would it reached the very high speed needed for ramjet to work though?
That is the ? in my mind
But nobody seems to touch that point.
likely rocket booster that falls off after a short burst or so I would imagine
Since it's solid fuel, perhaps the first part of the propellant also contains oxidized fuel. Think of it similar to the red igniter pad on an old school 155mm base charge.
Bristol Bloodhound from the 1950's or 60's Mach 3 and 190Km range?
Nice, very impressive missil engine! Great job . Wel done. Keep this thecnic away from stealing guys, please. This must stay as higly classified.
To Nammo - the summary under the title states Jet engine invented in the 1040's instead of 1940's This is obviously a typo error. You may want to correct thus
The UK produced two ram jet boosted AGM missiles in the late 1950's the Thunderbird and the longer range Bloodhound. The Bloodhound particularly the MK2 version was highly regarded and only phased out of Swedish service in the early. 2000's
actually so simple with no new technologies and no one tought about doing this before awesome hahaha
The SA-4, SA-6, Bomarc, Talos, Bloodhound and the Sea Dart were Ramjet powered Air Defence missiles. The Meteor is a current ramjet powered AAM. India is working on a ramjet powered Astra AAM.
Moskit, Oniks, Brahmos, ASMP, Hsuing Feng -3, XASM-3 are ramjet powered strike missiles.
So what's new about ramjet propulsion?
Meteor and Brahmos are solid fuelled. So is the Astra (ramjet version), ASMP, XASM-3 and Hsuing Feng-3, I think.
@Jack ripper My mistake. But Meteor and Astra (ramjet) have full solid fuelled propulsion. They need to be fired by fast maneuvering combat aircraft.
The true limiting factor is how far the radar can see that guides the missile (at least when we're talking AA like the PATRIOT system, etc.)
Not really because you can have an AWACS or an fighter closer to target or even another ground based or naval radar
well yes that too... but if engine is turned on long time missile would be able to actually turn around and other funny tricks. so basically kill distance would be much greater
Narator: Even lauch from submarines
Video: showing launch from truck
probably after launching the truck will rapidly submerge in nearby fjord =D
interesting stuff, kinda surprised this hasn't been apart of previous weapons systems since the concept of a ramjet and it's use is fairly old. Must be some progression in manufacturability that has made this cheaper or easier to make. but I suppose there are limits to it, like if launched from an aircraft the craft itself would have to be traveling at the operational speed for it to work otherwise it would need an additional stage to get the missile up to speed for the ram jet to work.
From what I've read, the major obstacle of development for ramjets became clear during extensive testing from the 50's to the 70's revealing that its operating speeds created temperatures that weren't survivable for any materials being used at the time. Hopefully with modern alloys and material development we'll soon be able to see the ramjet's true potential realized.
@@loganzacher9911 The British Thunderbird and Bloodhound missile systems both used ramjets. These were designed in the 50's and 60's and Bloodhound served until the early '90s in RAF service. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodhound_(missile)
@@richardprowse1088 oh wow I didn't realize that. I think what I read about ramjets was regarding their potential use in upper stage spacecraft which may be why they weren't able to build them to be durable/reusable enough for that application, but seeing that missiles are single use that would definitely make sense as to how they were able to make them work for that purpose despite not having materials strong enough to make them last beyond a single use or two
it was... P-800 Oniks for example and there are other older ones too. problem is that ram jet only starts to work above mach 1 so such missiles need 2 stages or at least starting booster to get to proper speed. also its not easy to make it proper shape for igniting propellant and keep that propellant burning
Taiwanese ramjet anti ship missile is doing well now. The Hsiung-Feng III anti ship missile.
i have that in my mind 20years now! and more!
Ballistic ramjet missiles ... Lord have mercy.
okay so don't you need the missile to already be moving for this to work in order to starting the mixing of the air and fuel i can see it working on an aircraft but how do you get initial take off.
The problem with high speed long range anti aircraft missiles is that they are easy to evade due to the laws of physics. Think of Bugs Bunny sidestepping a raging bull. The higher the speed difference, the harder the target is to hit.
I suppose this is why the Meteor missile contains a restartable ramjet motor.
This missile likely wont be much faster than a conventional missile, but it will retain the launch speed for much much longer. Aircraft have strict G limits, and usually contains a pilot that has a limit as well, they cannot out turn a mach 3-5 missile that can often withstand G forces 3 times higher. Long range air to air missiles are usually defeated by letting them bleed velocity, something which will be far harder to do against a missile with effectively 5 more fuel
Steffen Nilsen You need to update yourself on the laws of physics. In order to out turn a fighter, a missile must sustain several hundred G. The slower the missile, the less G is needed.
It is actually opposite. The more kinetic energy a missile has, the larger the no escape zone is. The Meteor missile, for example, enlarges the NEZ by increasing speed just before impact.
But how can this be when a fast-going object requires more force to turn?
Yes, the plane can make sharper turns, but the distance traveled at a new angle is meaningless if the speed of the projectile is much greater. Consider a projectile from a gun hitting a running person. Sure, the person can turn, but it will not help him dodge because of the high speed of the bullet.
This ramjet concept have stability?!
What happened when is raining, snowing, in minuses (-54) or (+65) temperatures ...
Some of what they say here is wishful thinking. It would be more truthful to compare a ramjet to a jet engine, they share more in common with these than rockets, despite basicaly being as simple as a flying stovepipe. Their efficiency starts out far, far, worse, but improves as speed increases, performing best at mach 2-3, and tapering off by mach 5 or so.
But they should perform excelently in terms of stability.
The fuels would be best compared to something like particularly enthusiastic candle wax. It is a solid, so does not disolve contaminants or pick up water like liquid fuels. Nor will it freeze or boil. They should also be less prone to degridation over time than rocket propellant. Oxidizer in rocket propellant and explosives wants to react with the fuel. This does happen even with a rocket just sitting in storage, just very slowly, leading to degredation of stability and other properties.
I don't know how much of a problem this is, being just a aerospace hobbyist, but i imagine not having oxidizer would help the situation immensely.
Plus, there are no bearings, seals or any other sort of mechanism you need to take careful care of. You should be able to put one of these things in a basic protective sleeve, and just leave it there for about forty years before you see any sort of issue. Best of luck with your blowing up of bad guys! Unless you're not NATO. In which case kindly become a democracy before reading this youtube comment.
@@Geolaminar that's the biggest thing, the fact that you dont need to maintain a missile like this means that a country can buy a tonne in bulk and save them for decades for potential war, not buy a few and shoot them before they expire, this is huge for logistics.
A lot of people point that ramjets are nothing new and it is true. The thing is that ramjets were mostly limited to large missiles like Bristol Bloodhound (2,2t) and RIM-8 Talos (3.5t). Soviets had some smaller ones like 2k12 KUB (600kg) but their range isn't that impressive. Rockets won (are more widely used) because they are simpler to design, control and deploy in field. You have your own oxidizer so you can control the burn more easily making a rocket easier to operate in wide range of weather conditions.
With ramjets you need to take into account atmospheric conditions, because they take the oxidizer from the air. The thing is, that now we have much better computers both in macro and micro scale and this changes everything. We have powerful supercomputers with sophisticated fluid dynamic models so we can design simpler engines tuned to wider range of speeds and conditions. We also have incredibly fast and light computers and sensors that can control those engines in real time. Modern computers give us a big opportunity to make smaller, simpler and more reliable ramjets then before.
Compare it to multi rotor drones and helicopters. Multi rotors are nothing new, a lot of the early helicopters were multi rotors like prototype of Sikorsky VS-300 (1940). What made modern multi rotors so successful is control systems. You do not need fancy mechanical blade pitch control if you have multiple propellers and can independently control their speeds fast enough. So we went from hard to pilot, expensive and impossible to miniaturize helicopters, to easy and cheap multi rotors, some of them size of a matchstick box and easy enough to be pilot by a 7 year old in their bedrooms.
The illustration showed 100% fuel. What gets the rocket up to speed? Surely an oxidizer is needed to get the rocket to speed before the ramjet works successfully???
Now i do feel safer.
Its kind of odd nobody looked into ramjets before, because the concept is older than the modern jet engine.
Ive seen guys make a pulsejet in high-school for their graduation project. We were 17 back then. I remember it needed a lot of initial air before it started properly. So they used a blower to get the engine running. But once it ran, it ran. It did make a lot of noise though.
I bet that if you have enough air due to the high airspeed it will do its thing. No problem.
The only thing is how do you convince a client? "Results dont lie" or so they say say..
There have been a number of ramje powered missiles. 2K11, 2K12, Bristol Bloodhound, BrahMos, Bomarc, Hsiung Feng III, Kh-31, MBDA ASMP, MBDA Meteor, P-270 Moskit, P-800 Oniks, RIM-8 Talos, Sea Dart, SM-64 Navaho. The MBDA Meteor was the first with a solid fuel ramjet.
Dr. Evil talking about rocket
300 seconds at mach 3 is 300+km range wow
The only problem is: Ramjets need to be accelerated to supersonic by a traditional rocket first, until they reach higher supersonic speeds. They are not very efficient yet.
I knew it! The "jet engine was invented in the 1040s," several decades before the Battle of Hastings. Which is why--as I've always said--William the Conqueror had F-14s, and the Normans won the battle, because with their old propeller-fighters, the English couldn't maintain air-superiority.... i know, it's a simple mistake. but i found it funny to imagine.
I thought ramjets were already in our current missiles, I'm surprised that they aren't. i see in the comments many have mentioned working with ramjet missiles or rockets, since the 1950s.... so I'm a bit confused as to why they were not already standard.
Germans used ramjet missiles called the V-1 and used a catapult to attain velocity to enable the ramjet
Not ramjet, v1 was pulsejet
Destroyers and battleships should carry those !
Ramjets need a high speed to compress air to work in a simple design. Launching from a ship will need oxygen tanks or some hybrid system.
Nothing new. The US Navy's Talos missile was a ramjet powered antiair weapon launched from a ship, and had a range of over 250 km (130 miles), and altitude ceiling of over 80,000 feet, and a speed of Mach 2.5.
I like this toy
Cool, now instead of using solid rocket propeller to get to mach speeds, use a rail gun
Will low atltitude engagements kill the range of this missile. They omly work high up
How do you get the missile to Mach 3 in the first place?
With a booster rocket, simple as that.
notafakeaccount so weight wasn’t a problem?
Ramjet works more efficiently around Mach 3 , it’s not the initial speed
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramjet
Supersonic rockets with long range technologies, this is not bad, but we already are talking about hypersonic rockets developed by Russians and Chinese.
Ramjet is there since many years.
Russian defence industries have been using this technology for a while.
We Indians manged to develop the fastest antiship land attack cruise system which has an ability to be launched from air surface and submarines.
This invention of yours is a truely a game changer
Now the only challenge remains that is to make it even lighter.
BRAMHOS NG will b tested for the 1st time in 2021-2022.
He can not be used from ground with
Out a catapulta right?
I thought that ramjust was only operating in the mach 3 to 6 range, and that's why the scramjet was invented to exceed this limit.
no... its 1,5 - 3,5 or something like that
Not taking away anything from this video... Can't help to think of Norsemen on Netflix when listening to the narrator.
Aren't initiatially developed in USSR russian heavy P-800 Oniks, exported as Yakhont and licensed in India as Brahmos ramjet driven? Previous soviet generation Granit and following after Oniks - Alfa are also ramjets. And as far as I remember first in late 50s early 60s till 90s long range SAMs in USA, UK and USSR second stages were also ramjet driven. If I'm not mistaken in the USSR GIRD tested ramjet in the 30s before first prototype turbojets were tested in UK and Germany.
This is the same concept for today's hypersonic missiles and glide vehicles?
Even spacex boosters?
Uthred Ragnarsson, is that you?
The problem is that that type of engine needs to be moving very fast before it can be lit. Something like 2 or 3 times the speed of sound. So it cant be lit from a stand still.
Yes, but fighter jets can reach that speeds, so maybe the missile wouldn't need anything fancy to start the ramjet.
why would you be firing air to air missiles while the plane isnt moving
Could be added to a first stage rocket engine if launched from the ground or a ship.
Yea there is always a first stage rocket, lock at the propulsion of the meteor. It has two motors in one.
It becomes more efficient at supersonic speeds, but ramjets can be lit at Mach .5 and are reasonably efficient at speeds as low as just under the speed of sound (to accelerate to higher speeds), which is jet airliner speed and about the slowest (say) a fighter is going to be going in a situation in which it would contemplate firing a missile.
ruclips.net/user/redirect?redir_token=J-OqxzlEuRp6dslES8lD71aIqrN8MTU5MTAxNTQ0NUAxNTkwOTI5MDQ1&stzid=UgzaCS724jboqrCwy0t4AaABAg.98yho_NSvfZ995_JpxUk5G&q=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FRamjet&event=comments
The American have those during the cold war, talos missile uses a ram jet and have a range of 180km, but those aren't used anymore because Ramsey are far more complex than solid rocket motor.
That is the most game-changing technological innovation that I've seen in a very long time.
That is absolutely brilliant.
I am very proud to be descended from Norwegians.
-Ariel Isaac Traasdahl
#Ihaveahighschooleducation
💀♠️🎯
WHat is new here? The Meteor and other missiles have this propulsion too
1:40 cannot be shot from a 155mm. it's got fins
Let’s see how it works for an ICBM!
What about payload?
I agree that the jet engine was invented in 1040
How does it gain speed to Mach 3 for ramjet to work tho?
Definitely it needs the first stage launching engine, either the launching vessel has to move adequately fast. In reality it does not need all Mach3 for ramjet start working, however it is the optimal speed for the most effective functioning begin.
The SR-71 used ramjets too. Turbojet at low speed, then conversion to ramjet at high speed.
the 1040's?
Except with stealth technology, how is an AA mobile radar going to track a target 500km away? The return signal will be too faint to track. The missile will have to have a sophisticated autonomous radar onboard. Distance from launch sight will be a problem.
Firing on a datalinked target that a separate radar is targeting would work. Some missiles in service already can do this
@@pickinthatbanjo Active countermeasures will spoof any active homing radar on a missile, I would expect.
@@sunshinecloudy Current generation missiles like the AIM-120C faired exceptionally well against countermeasures with a success rate of over ninety percent. I imagine the D variant improved upon that as would any modern missile.
You seem to overestimate a search radars ability to pickup a target with an exceedingly low cross section.
When can I get this in a 12 guage slug?😁
What you mean further then today what futuristic life you be livin
Sowas kostet den Steuerzahler dann wieder Millionen, dabei kann es fast jeder in der Garage selber machen
? how to get that initial required velocity ?
On an airplane it's obvious, it already have enough speed. From the ground or a vehicle, a booster unit with a conventional rocket provide initial thrust.
The ram-rocket technology used on missiles like SA-6.
I am sure the Ramjet can take the missiles further.But there is need for more powerful Radars and better guidance.I believe Indo Russia Joint venture Brahmos has both,apparently good for 500-600 kms.Russia has better missiles in Kalibr,S-400 and Zircon systems using scram Jet engines.
... where will the warhead be located ...
WHY IS THE NARRATOR SO WEIRD
Biggest invention Since the jet engine? That may be true, but Its old technology, invented long time ago, and its being used by several other nations, nothing new here.
One example if a operational missile Brahmos supersonic cruise missile
And still a liqud fuel ramjet.
you still have to get their 3000 mph
Inventions are new things. Ramjets were used in many missiles before, including Bloodhound and Sea Dart made by my company. Nothing new about ramjets.
The Brahmos has already got it a decade ago. What's new about it?
Its a secret. Norway have test it. All work fine. US what it next year.
Atmospheric oxygen is only 21% of the air, and the density of the air diminishes with altitude. This puts a real constraint on the performance of the engine, and limits the operating parameters of the missile. Cruise Missiles in current use already use jet propulsion, as far back as the Nazi V-1.
Yeah, this is marketing BS, but a ramjet shouldn't be much more affected by this than a conventional jet engine. Less, actualy, since it's able to attain higher speeds (and potentialy compression ratios) right? Unless you're talking about the narrow performance window of a given fuel grain design.
Common Air breathing Ram jets are not new... We have been using them since ages now...
Conveniently doesn’t address the problem with a ramjet missile, you have the get ramjets up to speed before they work. Such clear marketing bs without addressing fundamental limitations.
Yes. And as I said in one comment previously, they aren't even talking about G turns and speed retention, which is the thing that still make short air to air the best choice in a dogfight
booooooo misleading thumbnail, I was expecting a prototype launch. Think we all know it'd be amazing if it's able to be done effectively, the problem is doing it =D
They are saying speed and ranges, but nothing really about G turns those can pull.
In a fight for aerial supremacy a fighter could just pull a S turn and make the missile go in a complete diffenece way. Not to mention the low speed retention a ramjet has compared to a rocket
Different
Low speed retention?
But you are right, ramjets can suffer from flameout if their intakes are starved. I do hear solid fueled ramjets recover particularly quickly, and the missile can still turn just fine even after flameout on inertia alone.
Also, i am very suspicious of the idea that a sufficiently optimized intake would be starved of air simpily due to a high-gee turn. Ramjets have been tried as tipjets for helicopters, where forces exceeding 100G are sustained for hours at a time.
Soviet missile 2k12 KUB is with second stage ramjet propulsion since 1967. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K12_Kub
Wikipedia us wrong like most of the times. KUB doesn't have ramjet nor any liquid fueled engine. KUB has solid rocket motors for both stages one is booster other sustainer.
S200 did have liquid fueled second stage most likely ramjet while s75 dvina had regular liquid fueled rocket engine .
Thanks RUclips, until today I wasn´t even aware that I am on the market for high-tech long-range missiles.
Just what humanity needed. Wasted talent.
2:23
Ramjet engine was patented in 1913. That's not something new. Bunch of rockets has used this technology. Even SR-71 engines worked as ramjet over 3 Mach.
Biggest invention since the jet engine is taking it too far!
They're engineers, let them justify their lifestyles xD.
Give some to ukrainians they will test them for you.
“Ramjets could make a big impact” 🤣 Really ? At 7X the speed of sound a golf ball could make a big impact…..LOL
Why not use such great technology for something besides killing?
Yes why have self defense weapons at all?
Good idea. Though it has been operational since 1968 as part of the russian Kub missile. See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2K12_Kub
They also used tanks in ww1, so I guess there is zero difference between that and a modern tank... /sarcasm
@@Lobos222 you've just proved you're a crank...
Kub has two stage solid rocket motor no ramjet.
S200 probably has ramjet.
@@Slavkovic_Predrag AFAIK BUK launches as bipropellant solid rocket then the chamber burns through and turns into a ramjet.
@@svobodat59 how can that be when it has no air intakes lol. Idk where you got that idea from.
The Meteor missile already have a restartable ramjet motor.
The problem is still that the laws physics still apply.
Remember when Bugs Bunny sidesteps the raging bull? That is what aircraft can do to fast moving missiles in BVR engagements as long as the aircraft have proper sensors. And we are down to single digit hit probabilities. If you add electronic warfare it becomes even worse.
It is far cheaper to buy the aircraft from the pilot rather than try to shoot it down.
If you really, really, really want to shoot down an aircraft you have to reduce the speed of the missile when it is close to the target to close the speed of the target. If you get behind the target, the missile can accelerate.
The only other option is to have several missiles converging on the target from different directions.
BRAHMOS is a ramjet
Also Akash and its original, the SA-6.