These SR-71 Blackbirds
Discussion
Hugo a Gogo said:
but the Duxford one IS an SR71
Never said it wasn't.But if people think it looks different, it could be because they are thinking of one of the other variants - some of which are preserved in museums, sometimes masquerading as "SR-71s". I think the one preserved on the deck of the USS Intrepid in New York is actually an A-12.
there's a list on Wikipedia of which ones are SR71s and which ones are A12s
there's the YF12 which had a completely different nose
this one
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52...
seems to have the similar more 'bulbous' nose, whereas this one:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48...
has the flatter sharper one
(both seem to be SRs)
there's the YF12 which had a completely different nose
this one
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/52...
seems to have the similar more 'bulbous' nose, whereas this one:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/48...
has the flatter sharper one
(both seem to be SRs)
knight said:
Hooli said:
Isn't the one at Duxford an A-12 rather than a SR-71? If I'm right that'l explain the different shape.
I'm pretty sure the Duxford one is a genuine SR-71A.It is also 14 years ago today when the SR-71 last flew.
14 years, doesn't seem right does it when they are still faster & higher than the things we've got nowdays (as far as we know).
I think the world has changed since the heyday of the SR-71.
The capability and variety of satellites has moved on a lot in the intervening decade or so and the use of remote control and autonomous drones - including extreme long range and long endurance drones - has replaced the need for an aircraft such as the SR-71.
Operating the SR-71 was amazingly complex and expensive requiring thousands of personnel and specialised equipment, including a fleet of tankers specifically designed to refuel the SR-71 only.
Each SR-71 mission was almost the same as a space mission.
The capability and variety of satellites has moved on a lot in the intervening decade or so and the use of remote control and autonomous drones - including extreme long range and long endurance drones - has replaced the need for an aircraft such as the SR-71.
Operating the SR-71 was amazingly complex and expensive requiring thousands of personnel and specialised equipment, including a fleet of tankers specifically designed to refuel the SR-71 only.
Each SR-71 mission was almost the same as a space mission.
Hooli said:
I didn't know what was where, just that the noses vary.
14 years, doesn't seem right does it when they are still faster & higher than the things we've got nowdays (as far as we know).
Unless of course the "aurora" took over from the SR-71. Its a 'myth' but you never know. 14 years, doesn't seem right does it when they are still faster & higher than the things we've got nowdays (as far as we know).
I hope it has but I doubt it due to the budget that it would need.
Eric Mc said:
It didn't.
Although the ability to get a reconnaissance platform with an unpredictable schedule anywhere in the world within a short time is still a very desirable ability to posses. And I very much doubt that the US has forgone the ability to do this since the retirement of the SR71.I imagine the likes of stealth satellites, and/or ICBM based drone delivery systems have taken their place.
Certainly drones like the Global Hawk have gone a long way to carry on the type of work the SR71 did.
Hypersonic unmanned vehicles is an area that is certainly being worked on but operating a vehicles in the atmosphere at speeds in excess of Mach 5 is extremely difficult - both from a temperature limits point of view and an aerodynamic control point of view.
I think we are still some way off from having the ability to operate practical hypersonic (Mach 5 plus) aircraft, manned or unmanned , on a regular, operational basis is still some way off.
Perhaps the development of small, versatile, orbital winged vehicles, such as the X-37 may be a better solution as it allows the spacecraft to be more versatile than a regular satellite.
Hypersonic unmanned vehicles is an area that is certainly being worked on but operating a vehicles in the atmosphere at speeds in excess of Mach 5 is extremely difficult - both from a temperature limits point of view and an aerodynamic control point of view.
I think we are still some way off from having the ability to operate practical hypersonic (Mach 5 plus) aircraft, manned or unmanned , on a regular, operational basis is still some way off.
Perhaps the development of small, versatile, orbital winged vehicles, such as the X-37 may be a better solution as it allows the spacecraft to be more versatile than a regular satellite.
It's also worth noting that reconnaissance has moved away from a heavy reliance on radiation in the visual spectrum, to a much more broad band approach. The days of needing to actually "see pictures" of the enemy are really gone. Thanks to things like google earth etc, we now pretty much what every square inch of our planet looks like, and as a result, much more miltary eavesdropping and information recovery occurs from other media sources that can be intercepted beyond "line of sight"
When you read the mission profiles for the SR-71, the cost of the support services and the detailed planning needed to get them all into position at the right time boggles the mind!
When you read the mission profiles for the SR-71, the cost of the support services and the detailed planning needed to get them all into position at the right time boggles the mind!
there is the X-37, which presumably can cover some of the SR71's missions and more besides
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff