I just took pics (I did not buy it) at Bloomsburg gun show.
I’d take it! I’d take it! (If someone gave me lots of money first, that is.)
I would have taken it also.
How much money would I have needed to take it home with me?
Sorry, did not ask for the price, probably $150 or more
It would be in my collection.
Don’t suppose you happen to have any contact information?
Sorry, did not think of that, will do next time, I was just guessing the price.
That would be great!
I am a very interested buyer.
Really interesting piece. It would be nice to know the story behind it.
Looks like a field recovered piece, impact damage and all of the fins sheared off. You need to be careful of these “souvenirs” in that the guidance and sustainment motors often do not all burn during the flight. If they are capped the motor is still live and presents a hazard. You can see many of the expended motors in the picture, but all would need to be examined.
I’ve attached a photo of mine and the launcher, this example is a display piece that was never loaded, you can see the caps on the motor panels in the central body section.
I had a chance to qualify on the Dragon II during the interm Advanced Antitank Weapon System-Medium (AAWS-M) trials in 1985 or 86. The Dragon II had a 122 mm warhead with a trumpet shaped-charge liner that dramatically increased penetration. McDonnell Douglas spokesmen told me the Dragon’s unusual propulsion system used thrusters which were identical to those on the Gemeni spacecraft. They were canted at 22 degrees and provided both thrust and manuver. I also qualified on the Aerospatiale/Euromissile Milan II which was also competing for the interm replacement of the Dragon. The Bofors BILL was the third contender but I was not able to shoot it. The Milan, which has entirely different architecture, was certainly easier to operate than the Dragon, but it was not as difficult to shoot as critics have said. The sequential ignition of the thrusters has been noted here. You may well have un-ignited thrusters, depending on how far the Training Practice missile traveled before impacting the gorund. So beware static electricity, and handle with care.
What is that blue missile underneath the dragon launcher?
Could be a Redeye?
With the “intercept” on it could be a target rocket for AA missiles.
Hope Jeff can shed some light on it and maybe post a full view.
Not known for certain, but is believed to be connected to the Redeye program. At the time I was stationed at Ft. Bliss, the Center for Air Defense. This item was included on a load of scrap that we being dumped. At the time I was allowed to purchase items back from the scrap dealer for my personal use, a practice that was stopped years later after the Fontana fatality.
There is a very small rocket motor at the rear of the item, with four nozzles. It has a four-faced canted drag surface to provided limited spin. For a time it was believed that this was a launch trainer, basically a slug that would simulate missile launch during training.
While this could not be confirmed, there was a similar aluminum slug that was used by the USMC to simulate launch with the Stinger, in that case there was no motor and the slug would fly about 25-35 feet. Unfortunately, while our demolition range started at the back edge of the small missile launch complex, with it’s short launch distance the Marines never seemed to lose one of the trainers, they were reloadable and not scrapped and one was never added to the collection.
Jeff, sounds good to me, the Russians had (have) a “launch trainer” counterpart for their Manpads.
Their rocket motor had about the size of a can of Coke and the front section was an inert weight dummy.
Jean-Francois, very interesting to see!
I assume the manufacturer was “SM” back then?