• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Great SR-71 Story - How slow could it fly?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Gibsons said:
The YF 12 was the interceptor version. Idea was to arm it with nuclear AA missiles, it could reach out and touch sov bombers a very long way from target.
Click to expand...

I love that YF-12 missile test. The YF-12 firing a missile at mach3 + at a target 80 miles away on the deck, the missile falling from 80,000+ft and accelerating all the way until it hit at over mach 6. Who needs a warhead. 😛
 
It was a nice read, other than the obvious error in the first paragraph. It had the first flight at 1972, only a decade off.
 
Paratus said:
I love that YF-12 missile test. The YF-12 firing a missile at mach3 + at a target 80 miles away on the deck, the missile falling from 80,000+ft and accelerating all the way until it hit at over mach 6. Who needs a warhead. 😛
Click to expand...

Yeah, lots of energy at that speed. Although with a near miss, you'd be glad for the nuc or 100lb warhead.

Speaking of which, I remember in Skunk Works, Rich said they'd proposed blackbird strike bomber variants. The weapon would be a big steel dart, dropped from a blackbird, no warhead iirc. Don't remember if he said how big it would be.
 
cabri said:
I thought KJFK was the ICAO code for JFK in New York State

If you mean from Co to JFK, that makes partial sense.

Using the Sim, which airport did you launch from
KAPA (Centennial)
KDEN (Denver)
KFNL (Loveland/Ft Collins)
Click to expand...


Pretty smart. But if I say what airport I launched from then I'll give away my location here in CO. HAHAHAHA.

I do believe it took only 45 min. Yes, KJFK.
 
John Connor said:
Pretty smart. But if I say what airport I launched from then I'll give away my location here in CO. HAHAHAHA.

I do believe it took only 45 min. Yes, KJFK.
Click to expand...
Already pegged you as not KDEN or KAPA.

And i know you are north of Colfax and south of 80
 
The A-12/SR-71 series of aircraft were, and are, among the greatest things made by man. Kelly and his team broke through barriers and made the impossible possible.

There was a time when the USA made great things and tested ourselves to the limit. In addition to the Blackbird we built the greatest rockets and landed men on the Moon. Sadly, if the trend line continues, the last US manufacturing job will disappear by about 2055. I was a young boy of 12 when we landed on the moon and I'm nearing 60 now -- we need to leave footprints on Mars!


Brian
 
Gibsons said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_lift
Click to expand...

I don't think the SR-71 makes use of compression lift like the XB-70 does. I have found no sources supporting the idea on the internet, and not even the Concorde took advantage of it, despite it's downward wing droop as you move further out to the tip. Not only does either plane lack the wedge at the bottom to create enough shocks at the right moment, such minor downward tipping would be too small to really trap it properly in relevance to the rest of the aircraft. You see how big the moveable wingtips on the XB-70 had to be to take proper advantage of compression lift.
 
NUSNA_Moebius said:
I don't think the SR-71 makes use of compression lift like the XB-70 does. I have found no sources supporting the idea on the internet, and not even the Concorde took advantage of it, despite it's downward wing droop as you move further out to the tip. Not only does either plane lack the wedge at the bottom to create enough shocks at the right moment, such minor downward tipping would be too small to really trap it properly in relevance to the rest of the aircraft. You see how big the moveable wingtips on the XB-70 had to be to take proper advantage of compression lift.
Click to expand...

I thought it was so the wing tips wouldn't stall during a high attitude approach. The wingtips have less AOA than the rest of the wing/fusalage, so maybe they help keep the airflow attached?
 
NUSNA_Moebius said:
I don't think the SR-71 makes use of compression lift like the XB-70 does. I have found no sources supporting the idea on the internet, and not even the Concorde took advantage of it, despite it's downward wing droop as you move further out to the tip. Not only does either plane lack the wedge at the bottom to create enough shocks at the right moment, such minor downward tipping would be too small to really trap it properly in relevance to the rest of the aircraft. You see how big the moveable wingtips on the XB-70 had to be to take proper advantage of compression lift.
Click to expand...

?
I don't think the SR71 used compression lift either. The B-70 did. I got signals crossed.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top