File talk:Zamalka UMLACA 197 charred right.png

Image source?
Adam, what is the source for the top image. Video screenshot I suppose. It may have one of the best views of the UMLACA nozzle, which seems to be a standard 122 mm GRAD design. --DEADBEEF (talk)
 * Actual photo. It's from a small Facebook gallery Brown Moses linked to, cropped to emphasize the backdrop. --Caustic Logic (talk) 08:58, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

P.S. – It is interesting, that Brown Moses still has not figured out that the UMLACA uses standard GRAD components. Should I tell him? -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

You should hold your horses on that.

I've been going over more photos to see if there are variants in the design. I came across


 * Full set of photos of a 'CW' example

Referenced from Brown Moses article

In particular the image


 * Rear nozzle assembly

That shows a ~107mm motor nozzle surrounded by a dark liner - compliance or insulation? Surrounded by an incredibly thick light colored outer casing that the fins are welded to. That outer casing has an OD of 133mm!

Other images from the same series confirms the 133mm OD


 * fin mount OD
 * body tube circumference 420mm => 133mm OD

In this unit it's looking like an extended length 107mm rocket (4 standard segments stacked end on end) surrounded by a 3mm liner and an incredibly heavy outer tube of total wall thickness 10mm! If it's all steel that would be seriously heavy! Possibly aluminum?
 * I would guess aluminum. People seem to be lifting the things with little effort. Not much else to add here. --Caustic Logic (talk) 08:58, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I realise some of these were photos I used to surmise a 122mm rocket, but I hadn't seen the end-detail before. --DEADBEEF (talk) 02:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

I'll also explore the option that the nozzle is 107mm with a very thick ring to support the fins, but the substantive motor is 122mm with a much thinner outer case - that we see bends easily. That would make more sense but a bit more difficult to manufacture the body tube.

In support of this theory is the image showing the join to the payload cannister that strongly indicates a 122mm motor.


 * 122mm section?

--DEADBEEF (talk) 05:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Further digging around and now looking at the image this piece is about (bad me!). The conclusion is that there are two variants of the 'CW' missiles. The one I describe above and a different one that was found in Ghouta Aug 21 or later.

So now we have at least three possible variations. A 107mm nozzle 133 OD case 'CW' variant, a protuding nozzle 'CW' variant as shown in this image (OD unknown), and at least one HE variant as shown at


 * HE variant being disassembled

The HE variant does not appear to have a protuding nozzle making it more like the 107mm version I list above.

It's interesting that when they unscrew it, the HE variant nozzle appears quite long and unlike any conventional cargo rocket motor. --DEADBEEF (talk) 06:04, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


 * This photo is special, because it shows the nozzle. In the Brown Moses set it is not shown, as the nozzle is embedded inside the sleeve. I believe both have the same structure, the difference being that in one case the rocket has moved relative to the sleeve. I suspect movement happened here to rocket #197. The sleeve has been pushed forward by inertia while the rocket engine has stayed in place. In other photos it is possible to see how the sleeve has crumpled in the front end.
 * The nozzle we see is a standard 122 mm GRAD nozzle; the same one is also shown in the video of the HE variant.
 * I do not think this can be a 107 mm rocket. 1) It is too short, you cannot assemble multiple pieces. 2) It has 7 "boilerplate" holes for nozzles. In fact this cutaway shows it has 7 internal rocket engines.
 * I am not sure the whole sleeve is of the same thickness. This image shows a welded seam between the fin section and the tube section.
 * I do not think there are multiple versions of the rocket. What I see is just unprecise measurements. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 09:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

See also these simulation by Luccum with GRAD engine. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 09:27, 4 October 2013 (UTC)