Bloodhound Missile Simulated Firing & Target Interception.

[@mathewdavies1802]

These were still in use by 85 sqn at RAF West Raynham when I did my Rapier operators course in 1989, I never got the chance to have more than a cursory look at the bloodhound back then so it was interesting to see the engagement sequence of this much larger system. thank you.

[@markcollins7431]

I was at Raynham in 89.

[@mikesmith2905]

My Dad worked on Bloodhound, so of course he never told me anything about it, this was fascinating, thank you.

[@TallshrewFishing]

They say that something that looks _right_ probably is and I must say that these do look right. All that control and user interface tech looks very advanced for the time. Excellent video, thanks.

[@billpugh58]

Brilliant documentary. Could you lower the background music by 3dB? We don’t need it to understand the dangers and outcomes if Bloodhound was ever really needed. Thanks!

[@bertiewooster3326]

It was a beast of a missile !

[@petermurray6130]

It was indeed. It's amazing what Bristol and Ferranti achieved with such primitive technology.

[@Massimo-g7c]

As Ajax and Nike-Hercules was too

[@scroggins100]

Brought back a few memories. My brother was a Radar tech on I think 85 sqn for a while. Keep up the good work. Best regards

[@jongiant]

Fantastic insight into what would have gone on over the other side of the airfield.👍

[@miles2378]

I love the computer graphics!

[@Style-plus-renovations-NZ]

A few good memories 😊

[@felixtheswiss]

Greetings from an ex. Bloodhounder from Switzerland.

[@petermurray6130]

Hi Felix, thanks for your interest. bmpg.org.uk would be interested to share your recollections.

[@snake60toop]

Being an ex Air Radar (EE Lightning) guy, I find the technology fascinating. Can you explain the function of the launcher stalk aerial and the missile receivers, location of the antennas on the missile and in flight commands that would be uplinked? Never worked on these, but saw them whilst based at Bruggen early '83. Probably one of the most impressive sights I saw throughout my 22 years! Fabulous work. Congratulations to your team and I look forward to visiting the project in the future.

[@petermurray6130]

Thanks for your interest in the BMPG. The stalk aerial allowed the missile to receive the in-flight reference signal transmitted by the radar while it was sitting on the launcher. The missile had a rear-facing aerial hidden inside the aft fuselage, a steerable parabolic aerial inside the radome and four proximity fuse aerials around the forward fuselage. The command link transmitted just 4 commands, which allowed basic control of the missile doppler tracking loop (for ECCM purposes) and also switched the missile guidance to terminal homing mode at the appropriate time. Check out www.bmpg.org.uk.

[@michaelshore2300]

Left Brugan in 83. the stalk Aerial is The 'on launcher' reference Antenne the Missile was semi active and some Command instructions could be sent via the Radar beam and the signals that kept the missile working with 'it's radar' these signals were received via an antenna in the rear of the missile and before launch on the launcher via the stalk antenna.

[@timowen9938]

@@michaelshore2300 thank you.

[@TheKeithvidz]

home on jamming - forward thinking. The UK liked a jet powerplant for several missiles

[@richardvernon317]

Originally installed on Bloodhound Mk 1 as a Modification in 1961. In fact Fighter Command would not accept it until some form of ECCM was fitted to the missile and the radars used in the system. UK was no different to the USA and USSR as regards Ramjet powered weapons. USAF and USN fielded two service weapons (TALOS and BOMARC) and quite a large amount of the design features out of both were copied by the British into Bloodhound. Soviets also fielded two service weapons, SA-4 and SA-6. UK also fielded Sea Dart, which was basically a cross between a mini TALOS and a TARTER.

[@TheKeithvidz]

@@richardvernon317 All of those guided projectiles are known to me. Fun how you described Sea Dart as a mini. Rewatched or re read information on the British and US weapons recently. SD is part of my story - _The hardest: Biting Sea._

[@richardvernon317]

@@TheKeithvidz TALOS was huge (150% bigger in diameter than a Bloodhound), Sea Dart was a fraction of the size with a range around 80% that of the early RIM-8A

[@macieksoft]

Would be nice to have emulator of that thing. What were the computers used? Would it be possible to extract software?

[@petermurray6130]

The system uses a multi-processor Ferranti Argus 700 mainframe. The displays are driven by a long since obsolete, but thankfully very reliable, Ferranti CHARGE (raster graphics) system. We have a long term aim to emulate the graphics system to allow conversion to modern flat-screen displays.

[@Cartell1202]

The set up looks like something from the original Star Wars films. How effective would this system have been if the Cold War turned hot in the 1980's... would the system be able to successfully engage and destroy the Soviet bombers coming east and towards the UK or would have the Soviet's used ICBM's launched from submarines?

[@petermurray6130]

Hi Sam, Thankfully, we never had to find out! The system was tested regularly against friendly forces and remained effective against targets from low level to >60k feet. It was a key part of the UK's layered defence. Jammers and anti-radar missiles evolved rapidly through the eighties - systems available at the end of the decade would possibly have given Bloodhound a hard time.

[@Cartell1202]

@@petermurray6130 thanks for the answer. Good video by the way! Keep up the good work!

[@richardvernon317]

No capability at all against Ballistic Missiles or Air launched Stand Off Bombs or Cruise Missiles. Could deal with SU-24 if the aircraft could reach the UK or any high level recce birds like the Mig 25. Most attacks on the UK would have been stand off missile attacks from TU-22's or TU-16's with the missiles launched well outside Bloodhound's maximum range.

[@minilymo]

is this how it would of looked when it was deployed in the 1950's? They didn't even have colour tv's then did they?

[@petermurray6130]

The control console was installed in the mid-80s and represents a significant update on the original (orange scope) console. The modification also added a sophisticated training simulator, which allows us to demonstrate how the system would have been used.

[@richardvernon317]

This is the Mk 2 system introduced into service in 1964, but not operational until 1966/67. The Mk 1 missile system was a completely different beast and almost nothing within the 2 systems were compatible at an operational level.

[@miles2378]

what marvelous piece of technology is making that Klickitat klack noise?

[@petermurray6130]

Hi Christopher, We mention it in one of the earlier videos. It's a master timer (1 second per click) for the electro-mechanical units that controlled the missile preparation and firing sequences. The crews had rhythm!

[@arthurduncan5999]

I was stationed with 25 Sqn at RAF North Coates in 68/9

[@petermurray6130]

Hi Arthur. It would be great to hear your memories and share any photos of your time at North Coats. The group website is listed at the end of video.

[@arthurduncan5999]

I have posted some photos on contact@bmpg