(2 of 3)
¶Thiokol Chemical Corp., which started out in 1929 as a producer of synthetic rubber, is now No. 3 in the industry, specializing in solid-fuel rockets. By adding an oxidizing (i.e., oxygen containing) agent to its synthetic rubber compounds, Thiokor turned the rubber into a highly concentrated fuel, ideal for such weapons as the Army's Nike, Hercules and Lacrosse missiles, the Air Force's Falcon air-to-air missile and the three-stage Lockheed X-17 research missile, which recently shot 600 miles above the earth. With two more stages, say Thiokol engineers, the X-17 might even reach the moon. The company's business is already headed that way. From sales of $13 million in 1955, it grew to more than $21 million in 1956, will probably grow at least another $8 million this year.
¶ Reaction Motors, which has concentrated heavily on research since its founding in 1941, is just getting into mass production. Reaction made the first 350-lb. thrust engine for World War II's experimental Gorgon flying bomb, built the liquid fuel engines for Bell's X-1 series rocket planes. Currently, Reaction is at work on a rocket booster for a U.S. Air Force plane, has a contract to produce rockets with 500,000 Ibs. of thrust for supersonic Air Force test sleds. Another project: the rocket engine for North American's piloted X-15 rocket plane, which is scheduled to fly at altitudes of up to 100 miles and speeds of 5,000 m.p.h. Reaction's backlog: $10 million last year, $24.1 million this year.
Liquid v. Solid. Watching the figures soar, dozens of big companies are hurrying into the field to share the bonanza. General Electric, after a start in small rockets, is now producing the big (100,000-lb. thrust) first-stage rocket for the Vanguard earth satellite. Curtiss-Wright is producing small antitank rockets for the Army, is working on a throttle-equipped" rocket engine for planes and missiles. Bell Aircraft, Hercules Powder, Phillips Petroleum, General Motors and many others are developing new engines and materials to fuel them.
How far and how fast the rocketmen fly depends on how soon they learn to produce better fuels to power their engines. The great debate in the industry today, much like the old argument over air-cooled v. liquid-cooled engines, is over solid rocket propellants v. liquid rocket propellants. Most big rockets, including both Intercontinental and two of the three Intermediate-Range missiles, now use liquid fuels with an oxidizer such as nitric acid or hydrogen peroxide. Liquid systems have produced the highest thrust-weight ratio (80 Ibs. for each i Ib. of weight), but they require an enormously complex system of tanks, valves, pumps and generators. To feed and control its monster engines North American must have pumps capable of 8,000 gal. per minute (enough to empty a 20 ft. by 40 ft. swimming pool in less than five minutes), gas generators which have the power of a nine-ton diesel locomotive. Solid propellants such as Thiokol's rubber-base fuels are far simpler and safer to handle. Yet the trouble with solid fuels is that they do not have the power of liquid fuels, cannot be relied upon to burn at a constant rate.