|
Booblord Zagats posted:He kept them under NASA, at least. This is the reason the SR-71 will cease to exist, the SR-71 could be reborn as a viable R&D platform and we could learn and advance our space technology... If we only gave NASA an actual loving budget instead of calling them nerds, taking their lunch money and giving it to our corporate overlords.
|
![]() |
|
![]()
|
# ? Feb 19, 2025 15:58 |
|
Genocide Tendency posted:I want someone important to give me a good loving explanation as to why the SR71 is retired. To be fair, as awesome as the SR-71 is, recon satellites have advanced significantly vs their brethren around the time the SR-71 was operational -- and that's just public knowledge. Yeah, a SR-71 is far more flexible since it is a manned aircraft and you can task it rapidly instead of waiting for a pass, but increase the number of recon satellites (or burn fuel) and you get near real-time data at basically 0 political risk of having to explain why a pilot is now dead/captured/missing.
|
![]() |
|
Yea I love the Blackbird as much as anyone, but it's a marvelous relic of the past.
|
![]() |
|
We got lasers now, guys.
|
![]() |
|
movax posted:To be fair, as awesome as the SR-71 is, recon satellites have advanced significantly vs their brethren around the time the SR-71 was operational -- and that's just public knowledge. Also we have this thing, which can be launched (relatively) rapidly to fill any gaps in satellite coverage...and can then stay up for the better part of a year.
|
![]() |
|
I was watching the news the other day (Fox) and they said that the SR-71 got cancelled because of obamacare
|
![]() |
|
Bernard McFacknutah posted:I was watching the news the other day (Fox) and they said that the SR-71 got cancelled because of obamacare They're about 20 years too late on that one.
|
![]() |
|
Bernard McFacknutah posted:I was watching the news the other day (Fox) and they said that the SR-71 got cancelled because of obamacare Replace "Fox" with "The Sun" and credit it an equal amount of journalistic integrity.
|
![]() |
I don't have anything useful to add except that the SR71 loving owns bones. I read a book SR71 Revealed by a guy who flew it for years and every single thing about it is badass as all gently caress. They were gonna call it the YF12 at first or something but that sounds way more gay
|
|
![]() |
|
Y means it was in testing, and F means fighter. The YF-12 was a loving interceptor variant.
|
![]() |
|
You're all forgetting the fact that the titanium used to build the SR-71 was awesomely stolen from the Soviets through multiple front companies of the CIA.
|
![]() |
|
And no one really knows how fast the Blackbird actually was. The jet was never truly maxed out.
|
![]() |
|
holocaust bloopers posted:And no one really knows how fast the Blackbird actually was. The jet was never truly maxed out. That we know of ![]() (It's probably an absurdly high number) The thing had its flaws but it's a marvel. Doubly so when you think about the technology at its time of creation. Wonder if the current political / corporate environment at LockMart and DoD would even allow for such a project today (my guess is no).
|
![]() |
|
quote:There were a lot of things we couldn't do in an SR-71, but we were the fastest guys on the block and loved reminding our fellow aviators of this fact. People often asked us if, because of this fact, it was fun to fly the jet. Fun would not be the first word I would use to describe flying this plane. Intense, maybe. Even cerebral. But there was one day in our Sled experience when we would have to say that it was pure fun to be the fastest guys out there, at least for a moment.
|
![]() |
|
Godholio posted:Y means it was in testing, and F means fighter. The YF-12 was a loving interceptor variant. Don't forget about the bomber design study Lockheed did.
|
![]() |
|
movax posted:That we know of
|
![]() |
|
iyaayas01 posted:Don't forget about the bomber design study Lockheed did. Who needs ICBMs when you can just drop a few bombs off the centerline of a Blackbird? (No one, thats who!)
|
![]() |
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() bloops fucked around with this message at 21:38 on Dec 30, 2014 |
![]() |
|
The Sr-71 is the aeronautical version of the old AC Cobra. It's more art than utility, everything about it, from the looks, the smells and the way it makes you feel when you look at it, it's practically pornography
|
![]() |
|
Booblord Zagats posted:The Sr-71 is the aeronautical version of the old AC Cobra. It's more art than utility, everything about it, from the looks, the smells and the way it makes you feel when you look at it, it's practically pornography Good engineering is art.
|
![]() |
|
Genocide Tendency posted:I want someone important to give me a good loving explanation as to why the SR71 is retired. Rich Graham (last SR-71 Wing Commander) goes into that quite a lot in this book: http://www.amazon.com/SR-71-Revealed-Richard-H-Graham/dp/0760301220/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1419975813&sr=8-5&keywords=SR-71 Taking a job in that wing meant getting marginalized for senior command which meant there weren't any SR-71 defenders in the right places to stop it getting axed when people who didn't like the plane wanted it gone.
|
![]() |
|
This has been my favorite story from sled driver forever.
|
![]() |
|
Two Finger posted:I don't have anything useful to add except that the SR71 loving owns bones. Um, no. The original single seater was called the A-12 and was built for the CIA. Here you go, read all about it: http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/DOC_0000190094.pdf https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/a-12/index.html
|
![]() |
drgitlin posted:Rich Graham (last SR-71 Wing Commander) goes into that quite a lot in this book: http://www.amazon.com/SR-71-Revealed-Richard-H-Graham/dp/0760301220/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1419975813&sr=8-5&keywords=SR-71 That was the book I've read. Great read, I highly recommend it.
|
|
![]() |
|
Ospreys have a purpose I guess but are absolutely tiny inside considering their size. Still terrifying to ride in. 53s are loving gigantic inside and out
|
![]() |
|
Marines ruin everything. If they spent half as much time fighting as they do smelling their own farts and begging for more stuff they'd probably be unstoppable.
|
![]() |
|
FISTS CURE WOMEN posted:This has been my favorite story from sled driver forever. Google how slow one can go, and try to decide. I haven't read Sled Driver but I think I like that story even more.
|
![]() |
|
Tapir gunship ![]() ![]()
|
![]() |
|
drgitlin posted:Um, no. The original single seater was called the A-12 and was built for the CIA. Here you go, read all about it: http://www.foia.cia.gov/sites/default/files/DOC_0000190094.pdf I can't remember all the details, but the A-12 came first, then the YF-12 was the two-seater interceptor. The SR-71 was marginally based on the YF-12. I think they partially outed the existence of the A-12/YF-12 to cover up the brand new operations of the SR-71. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
|
![]() |
|
Another good Richard Graham book is Flying the SR-71 Blackbird. It gets pretty technical and dry in parts (he literally steps through most of the checklists line by line), but it's a very unique account that focuses on what it was like actually flying the thing on a mission. Not just "yeah, we're super high and fast and awesome", but lots of details on just how finnicky it was during certain phases of flight, and what life was like out on a det. Also the best description I've read of what an "unstart" actually is and how they dealt with it. Some other cool facts: contrary to a popular myth, the plane wasn't so hot after a mission that ground crew couldn't touch it. All of the exposed surfaces cooled down quickly during the descent phase. Recovery procedures actually required a ground crew member to climb up on top of the jet to deal with the drogue chute after landing. There were some parts that weren't directly exposed to airflow, like landing gear, that could stay pretty hot though. While it did leak fuel on deck to allow for expansion, it wasn't gushing out of the tanks like some accounts make it sound. They did normally hit up a tanker after takeoff, but not because they had lost so much fuel on deck; they just didn't take off with a full load due to max takeoff weight restrictions. They could do a ~90 minute training flight without refueling at all. They also found that the cockpit windows made for great hot plates to warm up their astronaut-style tubes of food during a mission. Hold it up against the glass for a few seconds on each side and your meat paste is much tastier!
|
![]() |
|
I'm playing through Valiant Hearts and learning poo poo about how WWI was apparently even more hosed up than I had already realized:![]() quote:Flechettes were dropped from aeroplanes or airships in great numbers, each canister holding between twenty and 250 flechettes. One French airman in March 1915 dropped 18,000 in one day over the German lines. The idea was that by dropping them at great heights they would acquire sufficient momentum (like a bullet) to allow them to pierce the heads, or bodies of enemy soldiers or civilians. http://www.awm.gov.au/collection/REL/00794.001/ ![]()
|
![]() |
GENDERWEIRD GREEDO posted:I'm playing through Valiant Hearts and learning poo poo about how WWI was apparently even more hosed up than I had already realized: They were used all the way through Vietnam, as the Lazy Dog bomb. ![]() Apparently before attack helicopters got good weapons, they would literally dump buckets of these out of the choppers.
|
|
![]() |
|
Well that poo poo is loving terrifying.
|
![]() |
Chinatown posted:Well that poo poo is loving terrifying. According to the source I got that pic from, at terminal velocity they impacted similarly to a .50 BMG bullet. Could penetrate up to 24 inches of packed sand.
|
|
![]() |
|
Mike-o posted:I can't remember all the details, but the A-12 came first, then the YF-12 was the two-seater interceptor. The SR-71 was marginally based on the YF-12. I think they partially outed the existence of the A-12/YF-12 to cover up the brand new operations of the SR-71. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. The A-12 was developed solely for the CIA under Project Oxcart in the late '50s/early '60s. It flew operationally for the CIA from '63 to '68, flying several sorties over North Vietnam as well as a couple over North Korea during the Pueblo incident. The YF-12 was developed for the USAF as a next-gen interceptor in the early '60s; it had its first flight in '63. The three YF-12 airframes were actually produced as part of the A-12's production run because Lockheed convinced the USAF that the YF-12 would be a relatively cheap fill-in for that mission after the XF-108 got cancelled. The SR-71 was developed for the USAF as an expanded/improved A-12; it had its first flight at the end of '64. As you can see from the timeline the YF-12 and SR-71 were kind of developed in parallel from the A-12, in separate efforts. The SR-71 actually conducted a fly-off with the A-12 in '67 to determine which program to leave in service. The decision was made that the SR-71 was the superior choice, despite being slightly lower performing (extra crewman and equipment) and slightly worse cameras...the increased flexibility brought on by the increased payload capacity, extra crewman, and ability to simultaneously collect IMINT and ELINT was judged superior. LBJ publicly acknowledged the YF-12 in '64, followed shortly thereafter by acknowledging the SR-71. The motivation was twofold: first, Goldwater had leveled charges against LBJ during the '64 campaign that LBJ was weak on defense. This was intended to address that. Second, by publicly acknowledging the YF-12 and SR-71 they were providing cover for the A-12. The YF-12 and SR-71 were both acknowledged as being still in development, so they were providing cover for the already operational but still covert A-12. Also whoever was talking about Cheney forcing Lockheed to destroy all the tooling is about 25 years too late, McNamara forced them to destroy all that poo poo in '68.
|
![]() |
|
In Huntsville, AL they have an SR-71 you go up to and look at up close. It's loving beautiful.
|
![]() |
|
iyaayas01 posted:Also whoever was talking about Cheney forcing Lockheed to destroy all the tooling is about 25 years too late, McNamara forced them to destroy all that poo poo in '68. Yeah I have old-guy-fuzzy-dumb memory but wasn't Cheney responsible for the axe on parts and tooling of F-14's? ...or at least blamed for it?
|
![]() |
|
Duke Chin posted:Yeah I have old-guy-fuzzy-dumb memory but wasn't Cheney responsible for the axe on parts and tooling of F-14's? ...or at least blamed for it? He was the one who killed the program in the late '80s. So yeah, he was responsible for destroying it, but it wasn't some vindictive "Congress cut your funding, but I'm going to make sure you stay dead by ordering your tooling melted down *evil laugh*." It was destroyed, but that was just a result of the production line shut down...like it is with most other aviation programs. The spare parts and boneyard airframe destruction was much later, '07 timeframe...Cheney didn't have anything to do with that.
|
![]() |
|
iyaayas01 posted:Cheney didn't have anything to do with that. Yeah he was too busy dealing with the fallout from blasting his ![]() ![]() ![]() Duke Chin fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Dec 31, 2014 |
![]() |
|
![]()
|
# ? Feb 19, 2025 15:58 |
|
If my brain full of airplane trivia is correct, the USAF had a serious problem with the Tomcat during the 90's as it was shaping up to be a helluva strike aircraft equal to or better than the F-15E.
|
![]() |