Any books on Firestreak & Red Top Missiles?

 I have just finished reading my late Uncle’s project report on the Firestreak project where i believe he worked in the capacity of project manager for De Havilland propellers. The book is hand typed and bound and a fascinating 118 pages of easy to follow script, diagrams and photographs regarding the development, testing and deployment of this missile. Some photos attached of the book and cover info until i work out what i can share and the best way of going about it.

As I haven’t decided what to do with the information right now, I will probably start with digitising the contents and take it from there.  Meantime, let me know if anyone has any specific questions that i could answer by reference to this book.

There’s an article on the development of the Firestreak missile in a recent addition of ‘The Avaition Historian’ magazine, issue 42

.https://www.theaviationhistorian.com/public-downloads/content-PDFs/tah42_contentspage.pdf

Hi Geoff,

i realise that im 10 years late to the party, but i have some info for you if you are still looking.

Regards,

Mark

Lightning – with the radar telling the Firestreak where to fly initially, the missile IR-seeker head wouldn’t need to “see” the heat source initially until after launch, in which case it follows the pre-determined course with it’s seeker head pointed in the right area to search. Does the radar provide any mid-course correction data, or does the IR-seeker head fully control the missile after launch?

AI23/B certainly not. I think there might have been a C version, possibly Saudi Airforce only.

I’m not particularly knowledgeable on missiles – only know what I’ve read and what others tell me.

My interest is from an engineering point of view. I’m intrigued by the fact that four different approaches were used to solve the same problem – i.e. Firestreak (IR), Falcon (Radar-guided & IR), Sparrow (Radar-guided), Sidewinder (IR). Within each were also sub-variations, e.g. 3 different types of radar-guidance experimented on the Sparrow. If you look at the three IR-guided missiles, each was integrated differently – Sidewinder self-seeking, Firestreak radar-cued, Falcon (not sure, need more reading).

Each was developed (and marketed) to a differing level of success. Vietnam perhaps gives a statistically false sense of that success with the shots per kill type ratios – really if you multiple-fire 2 or 3 missiles at a target, the first may hit, then there’s no target for the second or third to destroy – so only counts as 1 hit for 3 launches*……and Firestreak didn’t get involved in that conflict.

[ *Before anyone takes me to task over that example, yes I agree there were a lot of missile failures as well with rocket motors failing to ignite, failures to launch, etc. There were also many instances in Vietnam of missiles failing to guide, taking alternate heat signatures in preference, etc, but the straight percentage of hits per launch won’t tell you whether the pilot launched within a favourable envelope, or whether he ripple fired multiple missiles to ensure a kill when MiG engagements were relatively infrequent. ]

I remember (vaguely) a previous discussion here on this forum (or was it on PPRUNE?), about fuselage shielding of the IR-seeker head of the Firestreak by the slab-sided Lightning fuselage, which didn’t seem to be a problem on the F-8 Crusader with it’s fuselage side-mounted Sidewinder racks. I’m wondering how big a problem that would actually have been on either aircraft.

Lightning – with the radar telling the Firestreak where to fly initially, the missile IR-seeker head wouldn’t need to “see” the heat source initially until after launch, in which case it follows the pre-determined course with it’s seeker head pointed in the right area to search. Does the radar provide any mid-course correction data, or does the IR-seeker head fully control the missile after launch?

F-8 Crusader – with the Sidewinder IR-seeker head in active “uncaged” search/acquisition mode, the growl-tone wouldn’t occur while the fuselage side shielded the target heat source (if shielding did occur?). The pilot would keep manoeuvring until he got good tone on the Sidewinder-growl, and then launch. So again, how big a problem would it have been?

If I knew then what I know now, I wouldn’t have remained “just a techie”. I would have ignored my then wife’s objections, taken a commission and gotten my wings. Instead, she got her way (didn’t want to be an officers wife, go figure, maybe thought it was above her abilities to pull it off [not so]) and I had to wait until I was re-married and aged 64 before I finally got my Recreational Wings. Used to fly a Jabiru LSA55 and a few hours in a Crafter’s Sport-Cub.

Back to subject. You obviously know more about missiles than I ever will. Know exactly nowt about Sidewinders (except that it’s the name of one of my Flight sim control sticks) so I’m going to leave this to you and others to discuss. Hope you get the answers you’re looking for.

Deskpilot, there is no such thing as “just a….techie”. It all adds to the mix of knowledge. What you’ve just described has greatly increased my understanding of the differences between the two systems.

If I understand it all correctly from my reading thus far:

Sidewinder has a caged seeker (could be described as a hunting hawk with a hood over it’s head) until engaged to search – in which case the seeker becomes active (hood comes off the hawk). When the IR seeker has sufficient heat source, it activates the IR in-envelope growl-in-the-earphones to inform the pilot. The pilot meanwhile has to manage the flight envelope to ensure the missile is suitable aligned with the target flight envelope. When he judges it’s right, he fires the missile. The sidewinder-growl only tells him that the IR seeker sees a good target, not that it can get itself to the target. Hence the early hit-and-miss nature of initial Sidewinder engagements over Formosa and Vietnam. The advantage is a simpler missile – literally designed around a 5-inch high velocity unguided rocket casing – which can be strapped onto a larger range of delivery vehicles. Disadvantage (with the early less agile missiles anyway) is the greater reliance on the pilot to get all the lead-in maths done in his head on relative flight angles, etc while engaged in the heat of high-adrenalin activity.

Firestreak (and probably Red Top as well?) is an integrated system using onboard radar system of Lightning (possibly same for Sea Vixen and Javelin) to search and clue-in the missile for target acquisition. The IR-seeker head was only used for the terminal part of the missile engagement. If I understand correctly, initial flight path of missile computed by on-board systems via radar imagery – which then has added function of computing avoidance course for delivery vehicle. An advantage may have been a better definition of acceptable firing envelope for the pilot. The larger warhead of the Firestreak (compared to Sidewinder) would have been a plus (hence the perceived need to compute a disengage course for the pilot to follow in avoiding warhead, and presumably target, fragmentation). The disadvantage would have been a larger missile (and possibly less agile, though the larger warhead destructive range may have negated this) and certainly a greater necessity to interface with on-board radar systems of the delivery vehicle.

The Firestreak seems more similar to the early AIM-4 Falcon IR-versions though smaller and presumably more agile. In terms of ability to integrate onto a new aircraft….if we use an analogy of the different versions of the F-4 Phantom in Vietnam (as an example)…the Firestreak could not be retrofitted onto the F-4C, but may have been able to be fitted on to the F-4D which had the additional electronics to integrate carriage of the AIM-4 Falcon IR-versions. Which means – as a what-if – if the Firestreak (and Red Top) were successfully marketed, it could have found a niche as an replacement for the IR-versions of the Falcon missile on the F-4D/E, F-102, F-106, F-101B, SAAB-35, SAAB-37, but not as a replacement for the Sidewinder.

I think I need more reading to develop this hypothesis. Anyone know if the Firestreak/Red Top had as many problems with available coolant gas for the IR-seeker head as the AIM-4 Falcon?

Regards, …geoff

BTW:

… Western Australia? Another country isn’t it? 😀 ….

Funny you should say that, but with the election coverage in full swing, the local W.A. news have been airing discussion on the 1932(?) referendum when over 68% of West Aussies voted in favour of leaving the Commonwealth. I guess the goverment of the day saw enough sense to stay……..

G’day Geoff. Western Australia? Another country isn’t it? 😀 Can’t really help you with your inquiry. I was just an Air Radar Techie in the RAF, and later retrained as Navigational Instrument Tech. The radar units were AI23/B and they found, locked on and gave ‘Fire’ and “Breakaway’ signals to the pilot. As far as I know (not having dealt with the missiles themselves) once locked on the radar directed the missile where to look. It’s own, inbuilt tracking system then ‘locked on’ and once withing range, the pilot had the option as to fire or not. If fired, the radar then calculated where the debris would be and a steering ‘dot’ told him which way to go to avoid ingesting great chunks of alloy etc. To do this, the radar took into account, the closing speed of both aircraft, the distance between them at the time of impact and the projected paths that they were both on. The radars in those days could only see for about 160 miles but I don’t know what the missile flight distance was. The missile pack was a self contained unit and probably held more equipment used to actually fire the missiles rather than aid their lock-on. If memory serves me, once one unit was locked on, the radar could engage and lock the other missile to a secondary target. Hope this bit of babble helps.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]219877[/ATTACH]

One of my 74 Sqdn Lightnings fitted with Firestreak missiles.

The most information I have seen on the Firestreak was a display board at the Tangmere museum. It described quite well how the missile worked. Anyone got a photo?

Thanks for the input, folks.

AgCat – thanks for the reminder…..I’d forgotten about that weighty tome on the testing at Woomera. I’ll have to track it down via one of the university libraries.

Tyreman – thanks for the heads-up. Again, another book for the reference list.

Deskpilot – hello neighbour. I’m just across the border from you in W.A. – only a thousand miles away, give or take. 😉 I’ve just been reading about the Sidewinder development antics of Bill Maclean’s group at China Lake, and how “keep it simple – don’t solve the complex engineering, just design around it” seem to be their motto. I’d be keen on hearing about how you and your team went about solving the IR seeker-head problems on Firestreak/Red Top. The Sidewinder was reportedly an “almost-totally” strap-on kit….with perhaps only the guidance envelope tone (the electronics to provide the Sidewinder growl) as an interface with the airframe and electronics. Were the Firestreak/Red Top units as ‘relatively’ self-contained or was there greater reliance on the on-board systems?

Regards,
…geoff

As far as I can remember, the E.E.Lightning used both types. Firestreak flew up the exhaust/jet-pipe and destroyed the aircraft. Redtop flew along side the fuselage, exploded and sent out a type of chain-saw that destroyed the pilot. Could be wrong of course. My job was to get the missiles to see and lock on to the target.

British secret projects-Hypersonics,ramjets & missiles by Christ Gibson & Tony Butler as got a good chapter on British AAM development.

Well this thread set me thinking as I do not have anything in this area in my library. The best I could find was a book on the development of UK guided missiles up to 1960 which mentions Firesteak and Red Top but at £350 upwards it can jolly well stay with the vendor! I discovered in the process that we had an experimental anti-ship missile called “Green Cheese”, I kid you not. But I digress. Good luck with your search.

I think stuff for these is a bit thin on the ground, i had some scanned pages from a Firestreak AP somewhere but it wasn’t complete.

I am looking for Red Top Parts if anyone has any or knows of any, but not fins

BOW: I think a lot of the development firings may have been carried out at Woomera, in which case you need the book ‘Fire Across the Desert’ by Peter Morton. It was published as a hardback in Australia several years ago.

This book is a monumental piece of work and I know that it covers Blue Streak, as well as Thunderbird, Sea Slug and Bloodhound. I think there will be coverage of any Firestreak and Red Top testing carried out there.

Hello HP111. I’ve tried all the usual suspects…google, ABEBooks, Amazon, Book Depository, etc. A few general titles on air warfare in the missile age, a few encyclopedia-style books on missiles, a lot of references to EE/BAC Lightning aircraft, but nothing recognizable as a specific title on Firestreak/Red Top programs. I’m reading a book on the development of the Sidewinder at China Lake at present, and was hoping to get a more rounded picture by looking into design developments on the other side of the Atlantic.

Any recommendations would be appreciated.

Regards,
…geoff

Not a recommendation as such, but a search on Amazon books might throw up something suitable.