Aeronautical Insanity: switching to secondary tolerances

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > Aeronautical Insanity: switching to secondary tolerances

«‹›2233 »

winstor: Sep 20, 2009

loving love Helicopters. Went to a school with an aero program (that I was in), we had a visit one day from a Sikorsky S-70B-2 Seahawk operated by the Royal Australian Navy. Was loving awesome.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 11:01

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 24, 2024 09:45

Preoptopus: Aug 25, 2008; Ð¢ÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾ÑÐºÐ¸,
ÑÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾ ÑÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾ÑÐºÐ¸

Its a little dated, but for anyone who has not seen it and has 2 hours to spare, I highly recommend watching NOVA's : Battle of the X planes. As Boing and Lockheed go head to head in a competition to win the military "all inclusive aircraft" contract.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/23356/nova-battle-of-the-x-planes

# ? Apr 6, 2010 14:08

Boomerjinks: Jan 31, 2007; DINO DAMAGE

Preoptopus posted:

Its a little dated, but for anyone who has not seen it and has 2 hours to spare, I highly recommend watching NOVA's : Battle of the X planes. As Boing and Lockheed go head to head in a competition to win the military "all inclusive aircraft" contract.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/23356/nova-battle-of-the-x-planes

Ehhhhh. I really wanted to like that documentary, but the airplane fag inside me kept screaming that they shouldn't have been called "x-planes". Prototypes of a craft intended for production deserve a Y designation, X-planes are for weird-rear end experiments and proof-of-concept aircraft.

You can argue, but I'll still just cross my arms and go "hrmph."

edit: and for content

Low rider drives a little slower

Boomerjinks fucked around with this message at 20:49 on Apr 6, 2010

# ? Apr 6, 2010 20:29

ehnus: Apr 16, 2003; Now you're thinking with portals!

What kind of airplane is that?

# ? Apr 6, 2010 21:00

Boomerjinks: Jan 31, 2007; DINO DAMAGE

WB-57, basically the US bought the licensing to produce the British Canberra bomber, it sucked for what we wanted so we gunned it up, made it's engines start with a pyrotechnic charge, and then started using it for high-altitude weather monitoring, reconnaissance, and space program observation.

I think it's pretty, but I also LOVE goofy-looking planes.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 21:02

drgitlin: Jul 25, 2003; luv 2 get custom titles from a forum that goes into revolt when its told to stop using a bad word.

ApathyGifted posted:

There's another reason for tankers refueling tankers: Oceans.

If you have some sort of operation where large planes with a limited range are trying to get halfway across the world, they're gonna need to refuel in mid-air. But we don't have KC-10's and KC-135's parked on every island along the way there. So instead they have a sort of refueling pyramid. You may only need 1 KC-10 to refuel a flight of 4 F-16's, but that KC-10 needs enough fuel to get to the F-16's, refuel them, and get back to base. So it may get refueled by another KC-10 on the way to the F-16's, and refuel again on the way back. And the KC-10 that's refueling it may need to do the same.

I actually had a diagram at some point showing the refueling plan of some really big operation on a map, and it was basically 90% KC-10's and 10% warplanes.

You should see one of the charts that shows how the RAF pulled off the Black Buck raids.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 21:04

Full Collapse: Dec 4, 2002

Boomerjinks posted:

WB-57, basically the US bought the licensing to produce the British Canberra bomber, it sucked for what we wanted so we gunned it up, made it's engines start with a pyrotechnic charge, and then started using it for high-altitude weather monitoring, reconnaissance, and space program observation.

I think it's pretty, but I also LOVE goofy-looking planes.

Is the service ceiling on the WB variant any different from the initial airframe?

# ? Apr 6, 2010 21:05

429cj: Dec 25, 2006; by Ozma

Dr JonboyG posted:

You should see one of the charts that shows how the RAF pulled off the Black Buck raids.

I was able to find it... It's insane how much effort went into getting 1 bomber over a target.

Click here for the full 775x850 image.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 21:12

Preoptopus: Aug 25, 2008; Ð¢ÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾ÑÐºÐ¸,
ÑÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾ ÑÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾ÑÐºÐ¸

Boomerjinks posted:

Ehhhhh. I really wanted to like that documentary, but the airplane fag inside me kept screaming that they shouldn't have been called "x-planes". Prototypes of a craft intended for production deserve a Y designation, X-planes are for weird-rear end experiments and proof-of-concept aircraft.

You can argue, but I'll still just cross my arms and go "hrmph."

Haha I cant argue that. Although the fan lift idea is something out of a sci fi movie.
Too bad the F35 might be axed anyway.

Preoptopus fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Apr 6, 2010

# ? Apr 6, 2010 21:55

dangerz: Jan 12, 2005; when i move you move, just like that

Preoptopus posted:

Haha I cant argue that. Although the fan lift idea is something out of a sci fi movie.
Too bad the F35 might be axed anyway.

Where'd you hear that? The F22 production was cut but the F35 is going strong and will not be axed. Even if the USA somehow decides not to fund the program anymore, there are plenty of other countries that are still very interested that will keep it going.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 22:14

Preoptopus: Aug 25, 2008; Ð¢ÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾ÑÐºÐ¸,
ÑÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾ ÑÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾ÑÐºÐ¸

dangerz posted:

Where'd you hear that? The F22 production was cut but the F35 is going strong and will not be axed. Even if the USA somehow decides not to fund the program anymore, there are plenty of other countries that are still very interested that will keep it going.

Theres a thread about it http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3278360.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 22:21

InitialDave: Jun 14, 2007; I Want To Believe.

429cj posted:

I was able to find it... It's insane how much effort went into getting 1 bomber over a target.

Click here for the full 775x850 image.

Yeah, I was going to post this in response to the comment on multi-refuelling to allow for crazy overall range.

Might take a while, but it'll get you there, and you don't have to rely on having a closer base in a sympathetic country. It also makes a pretty good statement of "Actually, yes, we do mean it".

# ? Apr 6, 2010 22:22

dangerz: Jan 12, 2005; when i move you move, just like that

Preoptopus posted:

Theres a thread about it http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3278360.

That's interesting. I read the article and it's best summed up with this:

Original.Evil posted:

Maybe this is just me, but it seems like the only press we get anymore about fighter plane development is that it is full of bloated costs, long development times, and in recent times, outright failure.

It's just sensationalist news. First off let me start with a disclaimer: Everything I say is strictly my opinion and does not in any way shape or form constitute an official statement from Lockheed Martin. This is strictly personal opinion.

F35 isn't going to be cancelled. That being said, I strongly believe (as do many of the people I work with) that it's the last manned fighter that will be built. There's a lot of money invested in the F35 program from many different countries all over the world. If the USA were to pull out, there's enough to keep going from other countries.

It's normal to have cost-overrun in any kind of advanced program such as this. The government knows this and that's why they tolerate it. There are all kinds of techniques/metrics they use to measure whether it's worth going over cost (Earned Value being a big one) and they know what they're getting into. If the program is getting out of control, there are many checks and balances that come into play long beforehand that would stop it.

There's a lot of money invested in this program that people don't want to see just thrown away. The cost from the beginning of any fighter program is always over budget because there are so many variables. The same requirements that the government gave from the beginning will change all throughout the initial test phases. The F35 AA1 test article is nothing like the F35 that is on the runway right now and that's because things change a lot and force the company to restructure and rebudget.

Now that's just personal opinion and in a few years, someone could quote this and call me an idiot. From my position in Aero though (I'm part of one of the Cores which oversees every single airplane program we have) I haven't been given any indication that I should be concerned.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 22:40

azflyboy: Nov 9, 2005

Minto Took posted:

Is the service ceiling on the WB variant any different from the initial airframe?

Yep.

The B-57 models (both the British and Martin built versions) had a service ceiling around 48,000ft, whereas the RB-57 could operate around 65,000ft.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 23:11

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

dangerz posted:

It's just sensationalist news. First off let me start with a disclaimer: Everything I say is strictly my opinion and does not in any way shape or form constitute an official statement from Lockheed Martin. This is strictly personal opinion.

F35 isn't going to be cancelled. That being said, I strongly believe (as do many of the people I work with) that it's the last manned fighter that will be built. There's a lot of money invested in the F35 program from many different countries all over the world. If the USA were to pull out, there's enough to keep going from other countries.

It's normal to have cost-overrun in any kind of advanced program such as this. The government knows this and that's why they tolerate it. There are all kinds of techniques/metrics they use to measure whether it's worth going over cost (Earned Value being a big one) and they know what they're getting into. If the program is getting out of control, there are many checks and balances that come into play long beforehand that would stop it.

There's a lot of money invested in this program that people don't want to see just thrown away. The cost from the beginning of any fighter program is always over budget because there are so many variables. The same requirements that the government gave from the beginning will change all throughout the initial test phases. The F35 AA1 test article is nothing like the F35 that is on the runway right now and that's because things change a lot and force the company to restructure and rebudget.

Now that's just personal opinion and in a few years, someone could quote this and call me an idiot. From my position in Aero though (I'm part of one of the Cores which oversees every single airplane program we have) I haven't been given any indication that I should be concerned.

I agree there's no way the F-35 will be cancelled...but not for the reasons you listed. The only reason any other countries can afford the F-35 is economy of scale. The US is purchasing 2/3 of the current expected production run (2400 of just over 3000, something like that). If the US drops out...hell, if the USAF drops out, you're going to see smaller partners cancelling their orders and larger partners cutting theirs significantly.

But, the F-35 has too much political momentum. The current administration (and to a lesser extent the previous) has made it the centerpiece of US airpower. They've taken too strong a stand in propping it up (justifying the demise of the F-22, among other "savings" elsewhere) to do anything but bend over further.

To say the F-35's overruns are no different from other programs is ridiculous. A Nunn-McCurdy violation without mitigating circumstances (like an increased number of orders) is not a normal occurrence, nor should it be. The fact that R&D for one of the fundamental functions of the aircraft spiraled out of control due to technical and developmental problems shouldn't automatically be ignored. In this case there's not much choice...we need this airplane. Unfortunately there aren't enough options when it comes to designing the next generation of *insert almost any weapon system here*. The companies have little/no incentive to keep costs under control. The government will pay, and if they don't the program will get scrapped and another will start...and once again, there are only a handful of options.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 23:30

Seizure Meat: Jul 23, 2008; by Smythe

Honestly, with the advent of more technology that removes risk from warfare (such as pilotless aircraft) I'm a bit worried that low intensity conflict is going to become the norm.

Keep the cocky fuckers employed, will ya?

# ? Apr 6, 2010 23:44

Tetraptous: Nov 11, 2004; Dynamic instability during transition.

Boomerjinks posted:

WB-57, basically the US bought the licensing to produce the British Canberra bomber, it sucked for what we wanted so we gunned it up, made it's engines start with a pyrotechnic charge, and then started using it for high-altitude weather monitoring, reconnaissance, and space program observation.

I think it's pretty, but I also LOVE goofy-looking planes.

I was working a flight test program when one of these had engine trouble after a shuttle launch and had to come down at Moffett Field for repairs. Those guys took over our hanger, but were able to source an engine, replace it, test it, and head off back to JSC in about 48 hours. Seriously, the quickest NASA operation I've ever seen. I remember when I saw that thing roll up, I was scratching my head for a bit trying to figure out what sort of aircraft it was.

They've got a pretty nifty website, including a copy of the ops. manual.

# ? Apr 6, 2010 23:49

jandrese: Apr 3, 2007; by Tiny Fistpump

VikingSkull posted:

Honestly, with the advent of more technology that removes risk from warfare (such as pilotless aircraft) I'm a bit worried that low intensity conflict is going to become the norm.

Keep the cocky fuckers employed, will ya?

As opposed to any other time in history? Low intensity conflicts happen every day all over the world, and that's been true for all of recorded history.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 01:48

ApathyGifted: Aug 30, 2004; Tomorrow?

Dr JonboyG posted:

You should see one of the charts that shows how the RAF pulled off the Black Buck raids.

I had a sneaking suspicion that this is exactly what it was, and started thumbing through those old "Aircraft of the World" notebooks I have. I have a shitload of them. 7 full binders, and an index book.

Yeah, the chart was in one of the Vulcan's cards (it's got 2 in the collection: 1 for the plane, and 1 specifically for Black Buck.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 02:19

D C: Jun 20, 2004; 1-800-HOTLINEBLING
1-800-HOTLINEBLING
1-800-HOTLINEBLING

kris_b posted:

The school I work at had a visit the other week from the local Police Eagle unit. Eurocopter AS355 F1. According to the crew, the FLIR is worth more than the chopper.

F1 model twin-stars are the worst.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 03:02

OptimusMatrix: Nov 13, 2003; ASK ME ABOUT MUTILATING MY PET TO SUIT MY OWN AESTHETIC PREFERENCES

I read the whole thread but I'm not sure if this story was posted. It's an article from Gizmodo about a Sled Driver on a mission over Libya. It's a heart racing read.

http://gizmodo.com/5511236/the-thrill-of-flying-the-sr+71-blackbird

quote:

I can tell you about the SR-71 Blackbird's titanium frame, its Pratt&Whitney J58-P4 engines, or its genesis. But that's not important. What really matters is the thrill of flying it in an extremely dangerous mission, as remembered by this pilot.-JD

In April 1986, following an attack on American soldiers in a Berlin disco, President Reagan ordered the bombing of Muammar Qaddafi's terrorist camps in Libya. My duty was to fly over Libya and take photos recording the damage our F-111's had inflicted. Qaddafi had established a 'line of death,' a territorial marking across the Gulf of Sidra , swearing to shoot down any intruder that crossed the boundary. On the morning of April 15, I rocketed past the line at 2,125 mph.

I was piloting the SR-71 spy plane, the world's fastest jet, accompanied by Maj Walter Watson, the aircraft's reconnaissance systems officer (RSO). We had crossed into Libya and were approaching our final turn over the bleak desert landscape when Walter informed me that he was receiving missile launch signals. I quickly increased our speed, calculating the time it would take for the weapons-most likely SA-2 and SA-4 surface-to-air missiles capable of Mach 5 - to reach our altitude. I estimated that we could beat the rocket-powered missiles to the turn and stayed our course, betting our lives on the plane's performance.

After several agonizingly long seconds, we made the turn and blasted toward the Mediterranean 'You might want to pull it back,' Walter suggested. It was then that I noticed I still had the throttles full forward. The plane was flying a mile every 1.6 seconds, well above our Mach 3.2 limit. It was the fastest we would ever fly. I pulled the throttles to idle just south of Sicily , but we still overran the refueling tanker awaiting us over Gibraltar.

Scores of significant aircraft have been produced in the 100 years of flight, following the achievements of the Wright brothers, which we celebrate in December. Aircraft such as the Boeing 707, the F-86 Sabre Jet, and the P-51 Mustang are among the important machines that have flown our skies. But the SR-71, also known as the Blackbird, stands alone as a significant contributor to Cold War victory and as the fastest plane ever-and only 93 Air Force pilots ever steered the 'sled,' as we called our aircraft.

As inconceivable as it may sound, I once discarded the plane. Literally. My first encounter with the SR-71 came when I was 10 years old in the form of molded black plastic in a Revell kit. Cementing together the long fuselage parts proved tricky, and my finished product looked less than menacing. Glue,oozing from the seams, discolored the black plastic. It seemed ungainly alongside the fighter planes in my collection, and I threw it away.

Twenty-nine years later, I stood awe-struck in a Beale Air Force Base hangar, staring at the very real SR-71 before me. I had applied to fly the world's fastest jet and was receiving my first walk-around of our nation's most prestigious aircraft. In my previous 13 years as an Air Force fighter pilot, I had never seen an aircraft with such presence. At 107 feet long, it appeared big, but far from ungainly.

Ironically, the plane was dripping, much like the misshapen model had assembled in my youth. Fuel was seeping through the joints, raining down on the hangar floor. At Mach 3, the plane would expand several inches because of the severe temperature, which could heat the leading edge of the wing to 1,100 degrees. To prevent cracking, expansion joints had been built into the plane. Sealant resembling rubber glue covered the seams, but when the plane was subsonic, fuel would leak through the joints.

Origins
The SR-71 was the brainchild of Kelly Johnson, the famed Lockheed designer who created the P-38, the F-104 Starfighter, and the U-2. After the Soviets shot down Gary Powers' U-2 in 1960, Johnson began to develop an aircraft that would fly three miles higher and five times faster than the spy plane-and still be capable of photographing your license plate. However, flying at 2,000 mph would create intense heat on the aircraft's skin. Lockheed engineers used a titanium alloy to construct more than 90 percent of the SR-71, creating special tools and manufacturing procedures to hand-build each of the 40 planes. Special heat-resistant fuel, oil, and hydraulic fluids that would function at 85,000 feet and higher also had to be developed.

In 1962, the first Blackbird successfully flew, and in 1966, the same year I graduated from high school, the Air Force began flying operational SR-71 missions. I came to the program in 1983 with a sterling record and a recommendation from my commander, completing the weeklong interview and meeting Walter, my partner for the next four years He would ride four feet behind me, working all the cameras, radios, and electronic jamming equipment. I joked that if we were ever captured, he was the spy and I was just the driver. He told me to keep the pointy end forward.

We trained for a year, flying out of Beale AFB in California , Kadena Airbase in Okinawa, and RAF Mildenhall in England . On a typical training mission, we would take off near Sacramento, refuel over Nevada, accelerate into Montana, obtain high Mach over Colorado, turn right over New Mexico, speed across the Los Angeles Basin, run up the West Coast, turn right at Seattle, then return to Beale. Total flight time: two hours and 40 minutes.

One day, high above Arizona , we were monitoring the radio traffic of all the mortal airplanes below us. First, a Cessna pilot asked the air traffic controllers to check his ground speed. 'Ninety knots,' ATC replied. A twin Bonanza soon made the same request. 'One-twenty on the ground,' was the reply. To our surprise, a navy F-18 came over the radio with a ground speed check. I knew exactly what he was doing. Of course, he had a ground speed indicator in his cockpit, but he wanted to let all the bug-smashers in the valley know what real speed was 'Dusty 52, we show you at 620 on the ground,' ATC responded. The situation was too ripe. I heard the click of Walter's mike button in the rear seat. In his most innocent voice, Walter startled the controller by asking for a ground speed check from 81,000 feet, clearly above controlled airspace. In a cool, professional voice, the controller replied, ' Aspen 20, I show you at 1,982 knots on the ground.' We did not hear another transmis sion on that frequency all the way to the coast.

Permanent Awe
The Blackbird always showed us something new, each aircraft possessing its own unique personality. In time, we realized we were flying a national treasure. When we taxied out of our revetments for takeoff, people took notice. Traffic congregated near the airfield fences, because everyone wanted to see and hear the mighty SR-71 You could not be a part of this program and not come to love the airplane. Slowly, she revealed her secrets to us as we earned her trust.

One moonless night, while flying a routine training mission over the Pacific, I wondered what the sky would look like from 84,000 feet if the cockpit lighting were dark. While heading home on a straight course, I slowly turned down all of the lighting, reducing the glare and revealing the night sky. Within seconds, I turned the lights back up, fearful that the jet would know and somehow punish me. But my desire to see the sky overruled my caution, I dimmed the lighting again. To my amazement, I saw a bright light outside my window. As my eyes adjusted to the view, I realized that the brilliance was the broad expanse of the Milky Way, now a gleaming stripe across the sky. Where dark spaces in the sky had usually existed, there were now dense clusters of sparkling stars Shooting stars flashed across the canvas every few seconds. It was like a fireworks display with no sound. I knew I had to get my eyes back on the instruments, and reluctantly I brought my attention back inside. To my surprise, with the cockpit lighting still off, I could see every gauge, lit by starlight. In the plane's mirrors, I could see the eerie shine of my gold spacesuit incandescently illuminated in a celestial glow. I stole one last glance out the window. Despite our speed, we seemed still before the heavens, humbled in the radiance of a much greater power. For those few moments, I felt a part of something far more significant than anything we were doing in the plane. The sharp sound of Walt's voice on the radio brought me back to the tasks at hand as I prepared for our descent.

The SR-71 was an expensive aircraft to operate. The most significant cost was tanker support, and in 1990, confronted with budget cutbacks, the Air Force retired the SR-71.The Blackbird had outrun nearly 4,000 missiles, not once taking a scratch from enemy fire.

On her final flight, the Blackbird, destined for the Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum , sped from Los Angeles to Washington in 64 minutes, averaging 2,145 mph and setting four speed records.

The SR-71 served six presidents, protecting America for a quarter of a century. Unbeknownst to most of the country, the plane flew over North Vietnam , Red China, North Korea , the Middle East, South Africa , Cuba , Nicaragua , Iran , Libya , and the Falkland Islands . On a weekly basis, the SR-71 kept watch over every Soviet nuclear submarine and mobile missile site, and all of their troop movements. It was a key factor in winning the Cold War.

I am proud to say I flew about 500 hours in this aircraft. I knew her well. She gave way to no plane, proudly dragging her sonic boom through enemy backyards with great impunity. She defeated every missile, outran every MiG, and always brought us home. In the first 100 years of manned flight, no aircraft was more remarkable.

Approaching the Libyan Coast
With the Libyan coast fast approaching now, Walt asks me for the third time, if I think the jet will get to the speed and altitude we want in time. I tell him yes. I know he is concerned. He is dealing with the data; that's what engineers do, and I am glad he is. But I have my hands on the stick and throttles and can feel the heart of a thoroughbred, running now with the power and perfection she was designed to possess. I also talk to her. Like the combat veteran she is, the jet senses the target area and seems to prepare herself.

For the first time in two days, the inlet door closes flush and all vibration is gone. We've become so used to the constant buzzing that the jet sounds quiet now in comparison. The Mach correspondingly increases slightly and the jet is flying in that confidently smooth and steady style we have so often seen at these speeds. We reach our target altitude and speed, with five miles to spare. Entering the target area, in response to the jet's new-found vitality, Walt says, 'That's amazing' and with my left hand pushing two throttles farther forward, I think to myself that there is much they don't teach in engineering school.

Out my left window, Libya looks like one huge sandbox. A featureless brown terrain stretches all the way to the horizon. There is no sign of any activity. Then Walt tells me that he is getting lots of electronic signals, and they are not the friendly kind. The jet is performing perfectly now, flying better than she has in weeks. She seems to know where she is. She likes the high Mach, as we penetrate deeper into Libyan airspace. Leaving the footprint of our sonic boom across Benghazi , I sit motionless, with stilled hands on throttles and the pitch control, my eyes glued to the gauges.

Only the Mach indicator is moving, steadily increasing in hundredths, in a rhythmic consistency similar to the long distance runner who has caught his second wind and picked up the pace. The jet was made for this kind of performance and she wasn't about to let an errant inlet door make her miss the show. With the power of forty locomotives, we puncture the quiet African sky and continue farther south across a bleak landscape.

Under Attack
Walt continues to update me with numerous reactions he sees on the DEF panel. He is receiving missile tracking signals. With each mile we traverse, every two seconds, I become more uncomfortable driving deeper into this barren and hostile land. I am glad the DEF panel is not in the front seat. It would be a big distraction now, seeing the lights flashing. In contrast, my cockpit is 'quiet' as the jet purrs and relishes her new-found strength, continuing to slowly accelerate.

The spikes are full aft now, tucked twenty-six inches deep into the nacelles. With all inlet doors tightly shut, at 3.24 Mach, the J-58s are more like ramjets now, gulping 100,000 cubic feet of air per second. We are a roaring express now, and as we roll through the enemy's backyard, I hope our speed continues to defeat the missile radars below. We are approaching a turn, and this is good. It will only make it more difficult for any launched missile to solve the solution for hitting our aircraft.

I push the speed up at Walt's request. The jet does not skip a beat, nothing fluctuates, and the cameras have a rock steady platform. Walt received missile launch signals. Before he can say anything else, my left hand instinctively moves the throttles yet farther forward. My eyes are glued to temperature gauges now, as I know the jet will willingly go to speeds that can harm her. The temps are relatively cool and from all the warm temps we've encountered thus far, this surprises me but then, it really doesn't surprise me. Mach 3.31 and Walt is quiet for the moment.

I move my gloved finder across the small silver wheel on the autopilot panel which controls the aircraft's pitch. With the deft feel known to Swiss watchmakers, surgeons, and 'dinosaurs' (old- time pilots who not only fly an airplane but 'feel it'), I rotate the pitch wheel somewhere between one-sixteenth and one-eighth inch location, a position which yields the 500-foot-per-minute climb I desire. The jet raises her nose one-sixth of a degree and knows, I'll push her higher as she goes faster. The Mach continues to rise, but during this segment of our route, I am in no mood to pull throttles back.

Walt's voice pierces the quiet of my cockpit with the news of more missile launch signals. The gravity of Walter's voice tells me that he believes the signals to be a more valid threat than the others. Within seconds he tells me to 'push it up' and I firmly press both throttles against their stops. For the next few seconds, I will let the jet go as fast as she wants. A final turn is coming up and we both know that if we can hit that turn at this speed, we most likely will defeat any missiles. We are not there yet, though, and I'm wondering if Walt will call for a defensive turn off our course.

With no words spoken, I sense Walter is thinking in concert with me about maintaining our programmed course. To keep from worrying, I glance outside, wondering if I'll be able to visually pick up a missile aimed at us. Odd are the thoughts that wander through one's mind in times like these. I found myself recalling the words of former SR-71 pilots who were fired upon while flying missions over North Vietnam They said the few errant missile detonations they were able to observe from the cockpit looked like implosions rather than explosions. This was due to the great speed at which the jet was hurling away from the exploding missile.

I see nothing outside except the endless expanse of a steel blue sky and the broad patch of tan earth far below. I have only had my eyes out of the cockpit for seconds, but it seems like many minutes since I have last checked the gauges inside. Returning my attention inward, I glance first at the miles counter telling me how many more to go, until we can start our turn Then I note the Mach, and passing beyond 3.45, I realize that Walter and I have attained new personal records. The Mach continues to increase. The ride is incredibly smooth.

There seems to be a confirmed trust now, between me and the jet; she will not hesitate to deliver whatever speed we need, and I can count on no problems with the inlets. Walt and I are ultimately depending on the jet now - more so than normal - and she seems to know it. The cooler outside temperatures have awakened the spirit born into her years ago, when men dedicated to excellence took the time and care to build her well. With spikes and doors as tight as they can get, we are racing against the time it could take a missile to reach our altitude.

In Love With the Blackbird
It is a race this jet will not let us lose. The Mach eases to 3.5 as we crest 80,000 feet. We are a bullet now - except faster. We hit the turn, and I feel some relief as our nose swings away from a country we have seen quite enough of. Screaming past Tripoli , our phenomenal speed continues to rise, and the screaming Sled pummels the enemy one more time, laying down a parting sonic boom. In seconds, we can see nothing but the expansive blue of the Mediterranean . I realize that I still have my left hand full-forward and we're continuing to rocket along in maximum afterburner.

The TDI now shows us Mach numbers, not only new to our experience but flat out scary. Walt says the DEF panel is now quiet, and I know it is time to reduce our incredible speed. I pull the throttles to the min 'burner range and the jet still doesn't want to slow down. Normally the Mach would be affected immediately, when making such a large throttle movement, but for just a few moments old 960 just sat out there at the high Mach, she seemed to love and like the proud Sled she was, only began to slow when we were well out of danger.

I loved that jet.

vfp62.com is a site dedicated to the officers and enlisted men who served with VFP-62, Light Photographic Squadron 62, Home Base Cecil Field (NZC), FLA. It's full of great anecdotes and images.

OptimusMatrix fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Apr 7, 2010

# ? Apr 7, 2010 16:49

nurrwick: Jul 5, 2007

OptimusMatrix posted:

I read the whole thread but I'm not sure if this story was posted. It's an article from Gizmodo about a Sled Driver on a mission over Libya. It's a heart racing read.

I loved the SR-71 already, but that was one of the best stories I've ever read. Thank you.

Also, trying to think in terms of traveling a mile every 1.6 seconds is hurting my brain a little bit.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 18:55

ozziegt: Jul 8, 2005; cool under pressure

I don't know why OptimusMatrix didn't post the link to that Gizmodo article:

http://gizmodo.com/5511236/the-thrill-of-flying-the-sr+71-blackbird

# ? Apr 7, 2010 19:36

Maker Of Shoes: Sep 4, 2006; AWWWW YISSSSSSSSSS
DIS IS MAH JAM!!!!!!

ozziegt posted:

I don't know why OptimusMatrix didn't post the link to that Gizmodo article:

His boner got in the way. We're lucky we got that much. :fap:

# ? Apr 7, 2010 19:38

OptimusMatrix: Nov 13, 2003; ASK ME ABOUT MUTILATING MY PET TO SUIT MY OWN AESTHETIC PREFERENCES

ozziegt posted:

I don't know why OptimusMatrix didn't post the link to that Gizmodo article:

http://gizmodo.com/5511236/the-thrill-of-flying-the-sr+71-blackbird

Woops I thought I did. I'll add it now.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 19:43

ozziegt: Jul 8, 2005; cool under pressure

Articles like that just leave me in awe...

# ? Apr 7, 2010 19:48

Boomerjinks: Jan 31, 2007; DINO DAMAGE

quote:

After several agonizingly long seconds, we made the turn and blasted toward the Mediterranean 'You might want to pull it back,' Walter suggested. It was then that I noticed I still had the throttles full forward. The plane was flying a mile every 1.6 seconds, well above our Mach 3.2 limit. It was the fastest we would ever fly. I pulled the throttles to idle just south of Sicily , but we still overran the refueling tanker awaiting us over Gibraltar.

I couldn't stop laughing after reading this paragraph.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 20:00

Sterndotstern: Nov 16, 2002; by Y Kant Ozma Post

nurrwick posted:

I loved the SR-71 already, but that was one of the best stories I've ever read. Thank you.

Also, trying to think in terms of traveling a mile every 1.6 seconds is hurting my brain a little bit.

It's amazing to me that, 20 years after the first operational jet fighter, the jet had already reached its logical extreme, Mach 4 ramjets.

Watching Buzz Aldrin get kicked off of Dancing With The Stars while waiting for Lost to start last night, I realized that for every single one of those decorated badasses doing the flying and getting the glory, there's probably a 10,000 people they relied on to do THEIR jobs with the same perfection and professionalism that the drivers ultimately display.

The legion of engineers, materials scientists, machinists, mechanics, chemists and flight ops people who contributed to the existence of such a thing as the Apollo program or the SR-71, each with their own stories and heart swelling with pride at the staggering feats that would've been impossible without their particular contribution.

There used to be so many loving heroes.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 20:15

nurrwick: Jul 5, 2007

Sterndotstern posted:

The legion of engineers, materials scientists, machinists, mechanics, chemists and flight ops people who contributed to the existence of such a thing as the Apollo program or the SR-71, each with their own stories and heart swelling with pride at the staggering feats that would've been impossible without their particular contribution.

There used to be so many loving heroes.

Actually, the mere capability of craft like the U-2 and SR-71 and especially the X-31 are what inspired me to try to get into aeronautical engineering. Granted, the program didn't work out for me, but it was weird outside-the-envelope craft and the way they were designed and built that impressed me more than just being shiny fancy airplanes that could do crazy things.

Lately, I've come to the desire to go down and catch a shuttle launch because some reptilian part of my brain is telling me "this is it... this is the last great accomplishment of our time. A reusable space vehicle that big will never happen again in our lifetimes." And that means something - it really is the end of the era of support having its own life and meaning. Sure, we'll have survival things happen here and there - especially in water quality and management - but the freakin space shuttle, you know? It's only a select few were able to make use of the piles of thought and elbow grease that were the Apollo program, and it'd be unforgivable to not go witness firsthand the only thing that approaches that that's happened in my lifetime to even get the chance to appreciate it as a spectator... I can only imagine what it would be like to have worked on designing that hardware and then to have watched it succeed more or less for thirty years.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 20:27

slidebite: Nov 6, 2005; Good egg

Sterndotstern posted:

It's amazing to me that, 20 years after the first operational jet fighter, the jet had already reached its logical extreme, Mach 4 ramjets.

Absolutely. Similarly it amazes the heck out of me that barely 8 years after the first manned spaceflight we had people on the moon.

Nothing like a war or a race to make technological leaps in a hurry.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 20:53

InitialDave: Jun 14, 2007; I Want To Believe.

nurrwick posted:

Lately, I've come to the desire to go down and catch a shuttle launch because some reptilian part of my brain is telling me "this is it... this is the last great accomplishment of our time. A reusable space vehicle that big will never happen again in our lifetimes."

Anyone spending significant time around me will get to hear some fairly impressive rants on this and similar subjects. It feels like we've got a strange knack of taking seven years to do the impossible, then sitting with our collective thumbs up our arses for the next four decades.

# ? Apr 7, 2010 21:02

Seizure Meat: Jul 23, 2008; by Smythe

This thread just made me really sad

you loving downers

# ? Apr 7, 2010 21:23

Frank Dillinger: May 16, 2007; Jawohl mein herr!

OptimusMatrix posted:

I read the whole thread but I'm not sure if this story was posted. It's an article from Gizmodo about a Sled Driver on a mission over Libya. It's a heart racing read.

http://gizmodo.com/5511236/the-thrill-of-flying-the-sr+71-blackbird

pretty sure the pilot was Brian Shul, going by the story about his model SR-71. In related news, ITS HERE! ITS HERE! I HAVE SLED DRIVER, BITCHES

# ? Apr 7, 2010 21:49

OptimusMatrix: Nov 13, 2003; ASK ME ABOUT MUTILATING MY PET TO SUIT MY OWN AESTHETIC PREFERENCES

Frank Dillinger posted:

pretty sure the pilot was Brian Shul, going by the story about his model SR-71. In related news, ITS HERE! ITS HERE! I HAVE SLED DRIVER, BITCHES

FUCKKK YOUUUUUUU

# ? Apr 7, 2010 21:57

meltie: Nov 9, 2003; Not a sodding fridge.

InitialDave posted:

Anyone spending significant time around me will get to hear some fairly impressive rants on this and similar subjects. It feels like we've got a strange knack of taking seven years to do the impossible, then sitting with our collective thumbs up our arses for the next four decades.

There's a pint with your name on it some time.

# ? Apr 8, 2010 00:26

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

InitialDave posted:

Anyone spending significant time around me will get to hear some fairly impressive rants on this and similar subjects. It feels like we've got a strange knack of taking seven years to do the impossible, then sitting with our collective thumbs up our arses for the next four decades.

I'm thought about this too. It comes down to will, really. In the 60s we didn't really have the technology, but we still went to the moon. Nowadays our technology is much more advanced, but we completely lack the will and direction to do anything ambitious with it. If the farthest planning horizion you have is the next two fiscal quarters, it's no big suprise that there are no more heros.

# ? Apr 8, 2010 03:42

slidebite: Nov 6, 2005; Good egg

Nebakenezzer posted:

I'm thought about this too. It comes down to will, really. In the 60s we didn't really have the technology, but we still went to the moon. Nowadays our technology is much more advanced, but we completely lack the will and direction to do anything ambitious with it. If the farthest planning horizion you have is the next two fiscal quarters, it's no big suprise that there are no more heros.

Combination of that but we're also a heck of a lot more safety conscious now too. Apollo would never fly today based on their calculated failure rate which I read somewhere was something like 8% each launch for a loss of vehicle event (don't ask for the cite, I just remember that as a kid). And that doesn't even include the risks of gamma rays and other high energy particles when in deep space.

# ? Apr 8, 2010 04:05

Fornax Disaster: Apr 11, 2005; If you need me I'll be in Holodeck Four.

Sterndotstern posted:

Watching Buzz Aldrin get kicked off of Dancing With The Stars while waiting for Lost to start last night, I realized that for every single one of those decorated badasses doing the flying and getting the glory, there's probably a 10,000 people they relied on to do THEIR jobs with the same perfection and professionalism that the drivers ultimately display.

The legion of engineers, materials scientists, machinists, mechanics, chemists and flight ops people who contributed to the existence of such a thing as the Apollo program or the SR-71, each with their own stories and heart swelling with pride at the staggering feats that would've been impossible without their particular contribution.

There used to be so many loving heroes.

Ever seen the Norman Rockwell painting Apollo Space Team? It includes a lot of those people in it along with the astronauts and is really pretty inspiring.

# ? Apr 8, 2010 04:30

Muffinpox: Sep 7, 2004

Nebakenezzer posted:

I'm thought about this too. It comes down to will, really. In the 60s we didn't really have the technology, but we still went to the moon. Nowadays our technology is much more advanced, but we completely lack the will and direction to do anything ambitious with it. If the farthest planning horizion you have is the next two fiscal quarters, it's no big suprise that there are no more heros.

This is like explorers in the 1600s, they would come back with fanciful tales of monsters and dragons. Later on people went after the pioneers and guess what, there isn't poo poo that's exciting; the magic is gone and no one cares anymore when huge revolutions come in small pieces.

# ? Apr 8, 2010 04:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 24, 2024 09:45

Wombot: Sep 11, 2001

OptimusMatrix posted:

I read the whole thread but I'm not sure if this story was posted. It's an article from Gizmodo about a Sled Driver on a mission over Libya. It's a heart racing read.

http://gizmodo.com/5511236/the-thrill-of-flying-the-sr+71-blackbird

So correct me if I'm wrong here, but he says 1 mile every 1.6 seconds. That's 5760 mph, or mach 7.5 at Sea Level (8.64 @ 85,000 feet).

Mach 7.5.

# ? Apr 8, 2010 06:38

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > Aeronautical Insanity: switching to secondary tolerances

«‹›2233 »