James May at The Edge of Space

[PRTVR]

But I think it would have come as a shock to U2 to see another aircraft up with it, especially one like the lightning, I wonder if air to air missiles work at that altitude ?

[Eric Mc]

I'm sure they would.

[kurt535]

Eric Mc said:

But the U2 was chugging along merilly.

The U2 was designed specifically to fly at extreme altitudes. That is why it has such long thin wings. There are definite issues flying at such heights and the aircraft has to be handled VERY carefully - but that is what it takes to make it work.

sounds like a bloody Tiger Moth in a x-wind

[FourWheelDrift]

PRTVR said:

But I think it would have come as a shock to U2 to see another aircraft up with it, especially one like the lightning, I wonder if air to air missiles work at that altitude ?

Lightning pilot on the radio to U2 pilot : "Hey, what are you doing down here?"

[PRTVR]

FourWheelDrift said:

PRTVR said:

But I think it would have come as a shock to U2 to see another aircraft up with it, especially one like the lightning, I wonder if air to air missiles work at that altitude ?

Lightning pilot on the radio to U2 pilot : "Hey, what are you doing down here?"

U2 pilot leans forward and taps the dial.

[RedSpike66]

For me, EE Lightning one of the most exciting planes ever made... Sheer demonstration of straight line (horizontal or vertical) performance if every there was. Wings and a cockpit very much an after thought. Pretty much a missile with a seat.

I think air to air missile work - tend to be solid fuelled with their own oxygen supply

[PRTVR]

RedSpike66 said:

For me, EE Lightning one of the most exciting planes ever made... Sheer demonstration of straight line (horizontal or vertical) performance if every there was. Wings and a cockpit very much an after thought. Pretty much a missile with a seat.

I think air to air missile work - tend to be solid fuelled with their own oxygen supply

I was more thinking about how it would guide to the target, most of the early missiles were controlled by movable wings, would the small wings have enough effect to change the direction of the missile to hit the target.

[uncinqsix]

PRTVR said:

I was more thinking about how it would guide to the target, most of the early missiles were controlled by movable wings, would the small wings have enough effect to change the direction of the missile to hit the target.

Gary Powers found an answer (of sorts) to that question. That was a SAM though, no idea if air to air missiles behave differently.

[Krikkit]

uncinqsix said:

PRTVR said:

I was more thinking about how it would guide to the target, most of the early missiles were controlled by movable wings, would the small wings have enough effect to change the direction of the missile to hit the target.

Gary Powers found an answer (of sorts) to that question. That was a SAM though, no idea if air to air missiles behave differently.

Once they're travelling at mach 3+ it doesn't need much atmosphere to get a control surface working.

[PRTVR]

Came across this

https://theaviationist.com/2013/12/04/sr-71-speed-...

It looks like air to air missiles will not work at high altitude.

[Eric Mc]

Even pretty unaerodynamic lumps, like Gemini or Apollo space capsules could be "flown" aerodynamically at heights above 100,000 feet - simple because they are travelling at such enormous speeds (Mach 22 in the case of the Gemini and over Mach 30 for the Apollos).

[Tango13]

PRTVR said:

Came across this

https://theaviationist.com/2013/12/04/sr-71-speed-...

It looks like air to air missiles will not work at high altitude.

That article is wrong.

An SR-71 was damaged by a SAM missile, hit by a some shrapnel not much bigger than a finger nail.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Lockheed-SR-71-Missions-E...

[Eric Mc]

Adam Tooby's artwork for his book on the Lockheed A-12. It's based on a real incident. They weren't immune from missile attacks.

[Dr Jekyll]

Shedofdread said:

Truly some of the most beautiful imagery seen on TV. To experience something like that would be very special indeed. And to think, he got PAID to do that... Grrrr!

Well the highest I've gone is a mere 60,000 feet. Mind you, I was being served with champagne and caviar at the time.

[RedSpike66]

Dr Jekyll said:

Well the highest I've gone is a mere 60,000 feet. Mind you, I was being served with champagne and caviar at the time.

Ahhh... Concorde... Another favourite of mine... criminal that it's not still flying really... Never got to fly on it and I might actually be able to afford it now ... well, just the once !

Another example of British ingenuity (ok, the french helped) - was it the nose or soemthing ??), but the engines were definitely all British :-) and powered the mighty Vulcan too - albeit wihtout re-heat

[droopsnoot]

I recall reading an anecdote where the U2 pilots in their space suits were quite disgruntled to encounter a Concorde flying a little below them, and being able to see people in shirt sleeves enjoying their lunch. Not sure if there's any truth in it.

[Eric Mc]

droopsnoot said:

I recall reading an anecdote where the U2 pilots in their space suits were quite disgruntled to encounter a Concorde flying a little below them, and being able to see people in shirt sleeves enjoying their lunch. Not sure if there's any truth in it.

I doubt they would have been able to see much through the passenger cabin windows of Concorde. They are pretty tiny.

They might have been able to see the flight crew though.

The U2 would have been climbing or descending from a much higher altitude than Concorde was capable of.

[anonymous-user]

The thing about the U2 is not just the absolute altitude it is capable of, but also how much time it can spend on station at that height! Sure, a zoom climbed lightning could probably get up close enough, for about 10 seconds (enough to fire a missile, but hopeless for reconnaissance purposes)


BTW, a great (but pretty geeky) book on all things guided missile is this one:




Highly recommended and covers a lot of the tech used in A2A missiles, including guidance and steerage etc!

[aeropilot]

droopsnoot said:

I recall reading an anecdote where the U2 pilots in their space suits were quite disgruntled to encounter a Concorde flying a little below them, and being able to see people in shirt sleeves enjoying their lunch. Not sure if there's any truth in it.

I seriously doubt the U2 crew were able to see anything in detail, give the speed differential there would have been between the two aircraft at the time.....

[FourWheelDrift]

Max_Torque said:

The thing about the U2 is not just the absolute altitude it is capable of, but also how much time it can spend on station at that height! Sure, a zoom climbed lightning could probably get up close enough, for about 10 seconds (enough to fire a missile, but hopeless for reconnaissance purposes)

They did propose a photo recon version the Lightning, the P.15 in February 1956. It never went further perhaps for obvious reasons.

Along with these other project versions that never got off the drawing board.
P.3 Projected development of P.1 with side intakes, March 1951.
P.5 Projected development of P.1 with one Rolls-Royce Avon RA.12 with reheat, March 1952.
P.6 Projected development of Lightning to meet ER.134T (Bristol type 188 carried this out), April-August 1953.
P.8 Projected development of Lightning – tandem 2-seat high altitude fighter to meet F.155T (terminated requirement in 1957 white paper). Area-ruled fuselage, air-to-air missiles on wingtips. September 1955
P.15 Projected photo-reconnaissance version of Lightning, Feb 1956 .
P.18 Projected low-altitude bomber version of Lightning, Oct-Nov 1956.
P.19 Projected interceptor variant of Lightning.
P.23 Projected development of Lightning.
P.33 Projected 2-seat strike-fighter version for Australia.
P.34 Projected single-seat ground-attack version for RAF.
VG Lightning Projected version of Lightning T.5 with variable-geometry wing, enlarged ventral pack and folding fin for carrier-borne naval interceptor role, autumn 1963-April 1964.