HOME | DD
DonaldMoore909 — Shahin Rockets (PVC)
Published: 2019-02-12 00:22:33 +0000 UTC; Views: 1043; Favourites: 9; Downloads: 2
Redirect to original
Description
Is your enemy hiding in shelters trying to save their sorry asses from seeing their maker, well go heavier on the PVC Rockets. These babies carry a heavier explosive load and still you don't have to worry about busting your budget because when you buy all your military needs from Tropico you will be saving a shit load of cash.
Shahin 1 Rocket
Weight: 74 lb
Length: 6 ft
Diameter: 6 in
Warhead: High Explosives
Warhead Wt: 12.5 lb
Propellant: Solid Fuel
Range: 12 mi
The Shahin 1 is a cheap PVC type rocket but much larger compared to the Qassam Rockets. While the Qassam Rockets were used for barrage bombardment the Shahin is used for devastation work. The Shahin 1 is fired from a 8 rocket rack on the back of the WUV truck. The Shahin 2 uses the same launch system as the one so they can interchange with each other depending on the type of reloads available.
Shahin 2 Rocket
Weight: 175 lb
Length: 8 ft
Diameter: 8 in
Warhead: High Explosives
Warhead Wt: 30 lb
Propellant: Solid Fuel
Range: 16 mi
The Shahin 2 is a cheap PVC type rocket but much larger compared to the the Shahin 1 Rocket and also had over twice the warhead size. It was fired from from a 8 rocket rack on the back of the WUV truck. The Shahin 1 uses the same launch system as the two so they can interchange with each other depending on the type of reloads available.
Shahin 3 Rocket
Weight: 340 lb
Length: 10 ft
Diameter: 10 in
Warhead: High Explosives
Warhead Wt: 60 lb
Propellant: Solid Fuel
Range: 20 mi
The Shahin 3 Rocket is a very much longer rocket compared to the 1 & 2 and carries twive the warhead size of the Shahin 2. It was fired from from a 6 rocket rack on the back of the WUV truck. The Shahin 3 uses the same launch system as the 4 so they can interchange with each other depending on the type of reloads available.
Shahin 4 Rocket
Weight: 590 lb
Length: 12 ft
Diameter: 12 in
Warhead: High Explosives
Warhead Wt: 100 lb
Propellant: Solid Fuel
Range: 24 mi
The Shahin 4 s a very much longer rocket compared to the Shahin 3 and carried a heaver 100 lb warhead. t was fired from from a 6 rocket rack on the back of the WUV truck. The Shahin 4 uses the same launch system as the 3 so they can interchange with each other depending on the type of reloads available.
Related content
Comments: 8
This whole series reminds me of an idea I had for orbital rockets made of various commercial tanks and pressure-fed engines, in that while inefficient and relatively incapable, they both aim to make up for that with extremely low cost and mass production.
I notice that the values on the main image differ from those in the description. Any reason for that? Either way, I wonder if these values (and those of the other rockets) make sense... Do you have any thoughts as to what propellant these rockets would use? If I had that, I could see if they do... and possibly test the rockets on Kerbal Space Program with Realism Overhaul to determine (a value much closer to) their real ranges, etc.
I also wonder if a PVC-case rocket would be workable IRL. Because of their low cost and small size, they should all be testable as amateur rockets, so maybe that could be organized sometime in the future. In any case, they wouldn't be the most environmentally-friendly rockets, 'cause of that C.
Hmm... 14x Shahin 4 - 4x Shahin 4 - Shahin 4 - Shahin 1 - 3-in FFAR = Tropico into orbit?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Good catch on values, I missed these and they are a mistake will correct and Thanx for catching them. Right now I got a lot done. sort of but I am lagging behind on the stats so I am working on that. As for the propellant I would say the same as any commercial rocket to keep costs down which I believe is TNT. On ranges let me know what you find out, it would help me a lot because I just put a number down because I couldn't find anything to help me do that like on weights and gallons with tubes. I would think that PVC pipe would work since party rockets are made out of reinforced cardboard. As for melting like I said I think that would not be a real prob since there flight time is short and the heat is at the rear and a constant wind is going over the whole thing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
High explosives like TNT are almost never used on their own as rocket propellants, mostly because they burn too quickly. The propellants that I can envision being used in these are rocket candy and unaugmented potassium or ammonium-base composite.
The former is the absolute simplest and cheapest to create in small quantities, composed of a sugar and KNO3 oxidizer. R-Candy motors are used, for instance, by Hamas. It has very poor performance, with a specific impulse of 100-130 seconds at sea level (though much better than black powder's 50-80 seconds), and could be made from Tropico's presumably large quantities of sugar.
The latter has a specific impulse range of 180-250 seconds, the value depending on the exact mixture, atmospheric conditions, and nozzle expansion ratio. At the lower end, you have asphault-KNO3, which was the first practical "high-performance" propellant for large solid rocket motors. Considering that Tropico produces gasoline, such propellant mixture could be produced in large quantities. However, a higher-performance rubber-NH4NO3 could also likely be made with little extra cost—as a tropical country it probably grows natural rubber and/or is able to make synthetic rubber from the petroleum it refines, and NH4NO3 is a common component in fertilizer. Additives like aluminium and grains of high explosive are used to further increase performance (up to ~310 seconds in vacuum for some motors) in most "modern" (post-early-'60s) solid rocket motors for ballistic missiles and launch vehicles, but it is unlikely that Tropico has the infrastructure to make that cost-effective, along with other factors.
You are correct in that most heat is "at the rear end" in a solid motor with a well-designed burn pattern, but as the geometry of a rocket nozzle is meant to channel gases, it (especially the throat) will be exposed to extreme temperatures. Due to the poor thermal properties of PVC, the nozzle will have to be much heavier than that of most solid motors to resist burning through before the firing ceases, and while a very minor issue, as I said earlier burning PVC ain't exactly inert. Also, as in a solid rocket motor the whole casing serves as the combustion chamber, the chamber pressure can be no more than slightly above the maximum operational pressure of the pipes casing when used to carry fluids, which while I don't know exact values cannot be well above 10 bar compared with the 30+ bar that purpose-built solid rocket motors often exhibit. This poses limitations on efficiency (especially in the atmosphere where atmospheric pressure will resist the expansion of the exhaust) as well as the maximum acceleration/minimum burn time. Though for long range—given the weights you cite and the propellants, the potential range of the Shahin 4 is more likely to be around the original figure in your description, with a burn-out velocity of ~1 km/s—limiting the acceleration (and thus increasing burn time) somewhat is beneficial, as the greater gravity drag is less than the aerodynamic drag incurred by flying low in the atmosphere at high speeds. Thus, it is optimal to burn for a long time in order to accelerate in and reach altitudes outside the thicker regions of the atmosphere for long range.
However, this exoatmospheric burning actually isn't much of a problem (unlike what you believed), as heat loss to the atmosphere in most rockets is negligible, so if it can operate in the atmosphere it can almost certainly operate in vacuum. Also, high atmospheric speeds (Mach 1.5+) would actually heat up the casing and weaken it, not wick heat away.
So, the major problems faced by these rockets would be low chamber pressure and necessarily sustained heating of the nozzle throat. Overall, I SWAG that these rockets if using rubber-NH4NO3 propellant could attain a sea-level specific impulse around 185-200 seconds (limited by the aforementioned low chamber pressure) and a vacuum specific impulse around 220 seconds.
So there. Wow that was long... Hope you find this to be useful.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I very much do, I will copy and past this info to study on it. I did check out speed as a heat factor and also the temp at what PVC and CPVC can take. At the 600mph speed for the rockets they are very safe. PVC pipe is safe up to 750mph at sea level and CPVC is 900mph. As it goes up in height the speed of the rocket can go up to around 40,000 feet before some reason it starts to heat up again. I'm working on some missiles and they will use the CPVC pipe so they will be able to do the 950mph. Thanx so much for the propellants, didn't know about that that is what I will study and for giving me heads up on what Tropico can and can not make. Question, on war head charge, I use TNT mostly and SEMTEX or Plastic Explosive. They have SEMTEX being 4x the power of TNT so you get more bang for your buck. Do they use other stuff then TNT?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh I forgot to mention that I plan to use cheap sheet metal in the nozzles to help protect and reinforce the PVC pipe or should I do the whole rocket part of the tube?
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Thanx, I like to do things off the wall sometimes!
👍: 0 ⏩: 1