This is the amazing Lockheed Martin SR-72—the space Blackbird

reply to post by Zaphod58


DC-130A/E and Firebee drones were used from 64 in Vietnam by the 4080th SRW/ 4025th SRS. They used Helos to snag the parachutes deployed by the drone.

The 4080th was renumbered the 100th SRW and the 4025th became the 350th SRS in 1966.

4080th SRW /4025th SRS

reply to post by Stealthbomber


I think you mean SR-72.

Don't worry, I keep doing the same thing.

reply to post by Zaphod58


awe zaph, so those pics intelgurl posted are CGI?? Look real as anything to me!

reply to post by grey580


It looks like the Normandy from Mass Effect....

I ask my self why disclose the SR-72 now in this very difficult time for budget? USAF must finance the LRS-B and new tanker, I hope they can find budget for this hypersonic beast and I hope they finaly not cancell it because of tight budget. Surely it will be difficult to find money for new program like SR-72, I think there is a subscale demonstrator reday to fly somewhere in desert but for an operational 100 feet hypersonic bird its another story, may be is it possible for a futur little fleet of SR-72 to find money in black to escape the problem of budget?

reply to post by darksidius


From what I've been reading around the 'net -- they already have something better, and probably have for a while. The SR-72 is probably being phased out.

Another thing I dug up last night was a guy claiming his step-dad wrote the article. He said that the SR-72 demonstrator could "optionally" have a cockpit, but a fully functional production model would most likely be a UAV.

Additionally, speculation was going back and forth as to how a cockpit would work without windows. Given the extreme heat the SR-72 would encounter, an A/V system similar to the F-35 helmet would probably be used in conjunction with a retractable shield over any kind of window/canopy.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


Rockwell-Collins among others has some really nice synthetic vision systems.

reply to post by Zaphod58


Yeah I keep doing that I'm just used to writing SR-71 lol

reply to post by Stealthbomber


I've lost count of how many times I've caught myself doing it just in the last few pages.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


A shield over any windows wouldn't be necessary. The Shuttle windows (layers of aluminum silicate glass and fused silica glass) can handle the heat of re-entry. A virtual cockpit would be better though to maintain a smoother planform.

reply to post by grey580


Incredible.

reply to post by MystikMushroom


Yes there is a picture on the net about the same kind of plane with a cockpit and two oval little windows I search and will give the link.notreally.info...

reply to post by Sammamishman


I'd say that being how thick the space shuttle windows are they would be quite heavy, if your building a Mach 6 plane then you would want to minimize weight wherever possible, so if you could do it with cameras and screens with less weight then they probably would.

The SR-71's windows used to be so hot that the pilots couldn't touch them, they used to heat their meal up on them though

Zaphod58
The A-12 wasn't an attack variant, at least not the one related to the Blackbird. The A-12 Oxcart was the precursor to the SR-71. It was a single seat, lighter version, but was unarmed. The only armed member of the SR-71 family was the YF-12.

Well, there were several proposals for a strike variant of the Blackbird family. LeMay shelved them because SAC was so invested in the ongoing B-70 program.

Zaphod58
Even the ones launched from the B-52 ended up failing.

There were issues with the Air Force's use and handling of the drone. Kelly Johnson wanted everyone but the aircrew to be Lockheed contractors to prevent mishaps. I don't know that it would have made a difference, but by all accounts he thought it would have been successful otherwise.

Zaphod58
And just because I'm pretty sure most of you have never seen one, here is the DC-130.

There might be one in my avatar, too...

Aloysius the Gaul

kingofyo1
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

for the lack of need to transmit a signal halfway across the world to an armchair pilot, and have instantaneous reaction in case of a instantly needed situation fix

If the problem CAN be fixed - and if it can't then you've just lost a pilot as well.

For a recce mission at massive speed and altitude you are not looking at combat manouvres. the communication issue is required anyway since you will want real-time information rather than waiting for the aircraft to land to retrieve it.

And if your comm satellites were just jammed or experienced an 'adverse deorbit event' a few hours ago?

reply to post by Zaphod58


ummm hey Z? Just read this comment on Aviation weekly's 72 article:
The triple-digit SAMs do already intercept hypersonic targets.
S-300: up to M8,5 targets
S-400: M14
S-500 now being developed to intercept M20 target.
So, why all this trouble to eventually produce in some distant future a Mach6 target.


What do you make of it? Also, how would would we be able to get around a m20 SAM with a m6 plane? There's gotta be something we're not hearing thats relative to the issue, right?

kingofyo1
reply to post by Zaphod58

 

ummm hey Z? Just read this comment on Aviation weekly's 72 article:
The triple-digit SAMs do already intercept hypersonic targets.
S-300: up to M8,5 targets
S-400: M14
S-500 now being developed to intercept M20 target.
So, why all this trouble to eventually produce in some distant future a Mach6 target.


What do you make of it? Also, how would would we be able to get around a m20 SAM with a m6 plane? There's gotta be something we're not hearing thats relative to the issue, right?

First, at the altitudes involved, you don't have to overfly the target to observe it. You can standoff quite a distance and still garner a good deal of information. This is important as it relates to effective SAM ranges

If you picture the engagement envelope as a quasi-dome, the range of a SAM site is relatively small at high-altitude. Control-surfaces in the thin air at 80,000 feet are much, much less effective -- small fins on a missile are largely ineffective (somewhat offset by the vanes in the exhaust of some advanced SAMs). A very slight change of direction by the penetrating aircraft at the speeds/altitudes involved results in a difference of scores or hundreds of miles in the intercepting course -- this isn't something most missiles (or even manned interceptors are able to overcome. There is also the time element of detection to acquisition to lock-on to launch to intercept. It's not impossible that by the time these phases have been completed the target is already outside of the engagement envelope.

Directly related to time/range of detection/acquisition: plasma, ECM, etc.

reply to post by _Del_


Definite star for that knowledge, didn't know that and its a good thing to know! Thanks for that

mbkennel

Aloysius the Gaul

kingofyo1
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

for the lack of need to transmit a signal halfway across the world to an armchair pilot, and have instantaneous reaction in case of a instantly needed situation fix

If the problem CAN be fixed - and if it can't then you've just lost a pilot as well.

For a recce mission at massive speed and altitude you are not looking at combat manouvres. the communication issue is required anyway since you will want real-time information rather than waiting for the aircraft to land to retrieve it.

And if your comm satellites were just jammed or experienced an 'adverse deorbit event' a few hours ago?

then you do wait for the a/c to get back (or at least within direct datalink range) - and again it makes no difference whether there is a pilot on board or not.

for those looking at the recce "dome", from 30,000 feet the horizon is about 220 miles away, from 100,000 feet it is about 388 miles, and at 200,000 feet it is 548 miles away.

h = height above the earth
R = radius of the earth = 3959.87152 mi
d = distance you can see
___________
d = \/ 2Rh + h^2

Where was this new SR-72 built and tested?
Was it at Groom Lake, Edwards AFB, Palmdale Plant 42, or the Tonopah Test Range?