[nikhilarni]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Go and see NY by all means, but do visit the USS intrepid and see, amongst others, on the flight deck, a SR71!

http://www.jeroendorrestein.com/Fran.../New_York.html

Jeroen

Hi Jeroen,

Will surely visit them. The next time I go to NY, I will go with like minded folks and see the Intrepid

[sharc_biker]

The SR-71 Blackbird looks so futuristic that one would easily believe that it's a new generation design if they didn't already know that it is 5 decades old. It is hard to fathom how out of this world this plane would have looked when it was unveiled in the late 1960s.

The first time I saw one in the metal was at the Intrepid Museum in NYC in 2015. Some pictures of the same:

The P&W engine


The exhaust nozzle

[Jeroen]

A few youtube video's:

This is the disastrous launch of a drone. Interestingly enough the comments are from Kelly Johnsson.

https://youtu.be/GMyC2urCl_4

As this is a car forum a few links to some petrol heads:

Jeremy Clarksson wrote about this plane in his book, I know you got soul. An interesting book.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...Gpz_gLZUfIZchR

https://youtu.be/ogJSRa5cukc

A very different plane, but just as mythical, U2

https://youtu.be/uQenNw2s1cA

We often think of the Blackbird as the only Mach 3 capable plane. That is not ture, there have been others. Yet another Mach 3 plane. It did actually fly at mach 3 but never went into production:

[Foxbat]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

We often think of the Blackbird as the only Mach 3 capable plane. That is not ture, there have been others. Yet another Mach 3 plane. It did actually fly at mach 3 but never went into production:

Speaking of Mach 3 capable planes, here is one that actually flew at Mach 3, went into production and was used by the Indian Air Force.

Mig-25R "Foxbat"



The MiG-25 holds 29 world records. Among these is one which is unique, and which has not been beaten even to this day - the altitude record in an aircraft using jet engines. On Aug. 21, 1977, Soviet test pilot Alexander Fedotov climbed to an altitude of 123,523 feet above the Earth. This is higher than the altitude reached by a U-2.

P.S. I know many western sources will say it is a primitive aircraft, the engines will overheat if it goes past Mach 2.8, etc. but

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

Speaking of Mach 3 capable planes, here is one that actually flew at Mach 3, went into production and was used by the Indian Air Force.



Mig-25R "Foxbat"




P.S. I know many western sources will say it is a primitive aircraft, the engines will overheat if it goes past Mach 2.8, etc. but

Well those western sources were correct! It wasnt capable of sustained flight at those speeds. Admittedly, it did fly at those speeds, briefly.

What is interesting is that at the time it certainly impacted the US F15 design. Hence we now have F15s capable of M2.5+. Not sure how often either the Foxbat or the Eagle actually flew at these sorts of speeds. In all honesty, it appears more for PR then anything else. Endurance, range and payload is very restricted for both at the top end of their maximum speeds.

Still, I always admire the Russian designs. They manage to pull of quite remarkable performance with limited resources.

Jeroen

[lancer_rit]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

Thats not true, the Mig-25 was designed to intercept the B-70 Valkyrie a Mach 3 capable bomber which was being developed by the Americans in late 1950s however it never went into production.

You can find more information here:

http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...as-never-19438

Actually, all 3 planes were a target of MiG-25 even if the Mach3 bomber was the main objective. However, the SR71 actively flew over the Soviet skies, and the Soviets did want to try and bring it down/scare it away. In that sense, MiG-25 tried to do this job. MiG-31 was an improved successor of MiG-25 which posed more of a threat to SR71. However, with proliferation of satellites, need for SR71 flights dwindled and got eliminated eventually.

[Foxbat]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Well those western sources were correct!

Jeroen

I didn't know Western sources were always correct

Looks they there were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq after all!

or was that for PR purposes?

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by lancer_rit

Actually, all 3 planes were a target of MiG-25 even if the Mach3 bomber was the main objective. However, the SR71 actively flew over the Soviet skies, and the Soviets did want to try and bring it down/scare it away. In that sense, MiG-25 tried to do this job. MiG-31 was an improved successor of MiG-25 which posed more of a threat to SR71. However, with proliferation of satellites, need for SR71 flights dwindled and got eliminated eventually.

That was what they were supposed to do. However, in practice it fell short of its specifications. The main issue for the MIG 25 and the F15 was that although they were capable of these speeds and altitudes it was for a very short time, limited range, limited endurance and limited pay load. That’s all I’m saying

Originally Posted by Foxbat

I didn't know Western sources were always correct

Looks they there were Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq after all!

or was that for PR purposes?

Western Sources are often wrong, but over time rarely as history has shown time after time. This all very dated, extremely well understood aviation technology. Nothing secret about it. So everybody can make their own conclusions.

I’m no expert. But as I said in my previous and in this post, both the F15 and the MIG 15 have limited endurance, range and payload at these extraordinary altitudes and speeds. Making their effective use as an interceptor limited.

And now, they were not weapons of mass destruction. At least not primarily. They were very much envisages as interceptors although they could do bombing as well. but not at those speeds or from those altitudes!

Jeroen

[Foxbat]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

Western Sources are often wrong, but over time rarely as history has shown time after time. This all very dated, extremely well understood aviation technology. Nothing secret about it. So everybody can make their own conclusions.



And now, they were not weapons of mass destruction. At least not primarily. They were very much envisages as interceptors although they could do bombing as well. but not at those speeds or from those altitudes!

Jeroen

The point about WMDs was a joke, I was pointing out that Western sources are not always correct and majority of the news you hear is finely packaged propaganda tailored for the domestic audience.

If you listen to the news about the Syrian War from CNN or the BBC compared to Russia Today or Al-Jazeera you will think they are talking about two different conflicts.

I grew up in the US till my teenage years and then moved to India. Through history books, news, books I was made to believe the Soviets are evil and have primitive weapons and the US was the savior of the world.

Having spent the last 20 years India I know nothing can be further from the truth.

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

The point about WMDs was a joke, I was pointing out that Western sources are not always correct and majority of the news you hear is finely packaged propaganda tailored for the domestic audience.

If you listen to the news about the Syrian War from CNN or the BBC compared to Russia Today or Al-Jazeera you will think they are talking about two different conflicts.

I grew up in the US till my teenage years and then moved to India. Through history books, news, books I was made to believe the Soviets are evil and have primitive weapons and the US was the savior of the world.

Having spent the last 20 years India I know nothing can be further from the truth.

Well, for me the “west” and the “USA” are two different things. Having lived, worked and studied in both for many years I have come to this conclusion.

You read newspapers in say Los Angeles, San Francisco compared to say Dallas and you would think you are living in different countries too. So it’s really up to oneself on how wide you cast your net to get information. Not always easy.

We lived in Kansas City, the MidWest. A true Republican strong hold. We loved going to the west coast, just to hear different topics being discussed in a different way on the local radio stations, local papers etc.

There is one common denominator though, they do have a free press. So the press might have a certain bias, be it right, left, centre, or otherwise, I would rarely consider it propaganda. At least not propaganda from the power that be. At best some of the are affiliated or supportive of a certain political directions. And they are always very open about that. The current press war between Trump and most of the USA and western press as being an excellent example

Still, by and large, I do think Russian, at least the power that are, I find pretty evil, and I think history and current affairs are showing such. If anything they are far removed from a democracy. Not transparency, no oversight, no critical press (you can’t be even be biased, unless you are pro the existing powers that be.)

And yes, technically speaking the Russian are almost always outclassed by others, mostly the Americans, these days others, including the Chinese. Even so, they have managed to achieve some remarkable achievements. Be it in aviation, space exploration and various other high tech endeavours. Which just proves the point that having the “highest” tech is not necessarily always required to be the best.

I have spend considerable time in the Siberia and the last 18 months, since leaving India I have actually spend working/travelling throughout Russia and some of it’s affiliates (think the various “-Stan” countries.

Whereas I can honestly say that most of the individuals I deal with are quite professional, friendly and quite often very engaging to work with, I don’t like this area of the world much. It’s very corrupt, no free press, everybody is very wary of the government, everybody has a story of family members being killed and or thrown in jail by the power that be, not a free democracy.

Democracies are not perfect, far from it. But anything not a democracy is a hell of a lot worse is my experience. Russia in my book was evil and still is.

The USA has never been the saviour of the world in my book either. But admittedly they have stepped into various conflict such as WW! and WW2 and supported the western European allies at the time. Whether you believe that was worthwhile could be up to debate. But I can tell you, if it wasn’t for the Americans (and others, notably the Brits) the Netherlands would still be under Nazi regime!

I absolutely detest the current US and Trump. But I will take it any day over Russia and Putin.

Back to aviation now!

Jeroen

[Jeroen]

some reference have been made to books about the SR71; There are quite a few out there.

Here are two of my favourite books:

https://www.amazon.com/SR-71-Complet...&keywords=sr71

https://www.amazon.com/Lockheed-SR-7...&keywords=sr71

The Haynes “owner” workshop manual is pretty good. These days Haynes produces these manuals on all sort of stuff: I have one on Concorde and Apollo too. But they do Spitfire, Mustang and a whole host of other planes. I seem to recall one on teenagers as well! And of course, Cars. got a bunch of those too.

Jeroen

[SR-71]

Originally Posted by Foxbat

Speaking of Mach 3 capable planes, here is one that actually flew at Mach 3, went into production and was used by the Indian Air Force.

Mig-25R "Foxbat"

P.S. I know many western sources will say it is a primitive aircraft, the engines will overheat if it goes past Mach 2.8, etc. but

Yes, the Foxbat was capable of Mach 3+ speed, but the problem was it could never sustain those speeds not could it fly as high as the SR-71 did. Infact its said that the Russians developed the Mig 31 (a.k.a) Foxhound program with SR-71 in mind and to actually overcome the deficiencies of Foxbat. The Foxhounds were the only ones that ever came closest to intercepting an SR-71.

Quoting the aviationist:

On Sept. 3, 2012 an article written by Rakesh Krishman Simha for Indrus.in explains how the Foxhound was able to stop Blackbirds spy missions over Soviet Union on Jun. 3, 1986. That day, no less than six MiG-31s “intercepted” an SR-71 over the Barents Sea by performing a coordinated interception that subjected the Blackbird to a possible all angle air-to-air missiles attack. Apparently, after this interception, no SR-71 flew a reconnaissance missions over the Soviet Union and few years later the Blackbird was retired to be replaced with the satellites. Even if claiming that the MiG-31 was one of the causes of the SR-71 retirement is a bit far fetched, it is safe to say that towards the end of the career of the legendary spyplane, Russians proved to have developed tactics that could put the Blackbird at risk.

For the full article - https://theaviationist.com/2013/12/11/sr-71-vs-mig-31/

[Jeroen]

Originally Posted by SR-71

Yes, the Foxbat was capable of Mach 3+ speed, but the problem was it could never sustain those speeds not could it fly as high as the SR-71 did. Infact its said that the Russians developed the Mig 31 (a.k.a) Foxhound program with SR-71 in mind and to actually overcome the deficiencies of Foxbat. The Foxhounds were the only ones that ever came closest to intercepting an SR-71.
]

Thanks for that link. Although there have been several planes from various nations, capable of Mach 3+, very few went into real production, even fewer managed to do Mach3+ or so for a prolonged time/range. Land, bit of maintenance and do it again.

Even so, any plane that does Mach 3+, even for short duration, deserves a place in aviation history. It is very tricky to say the least.

Going by your name, you must be a big fan of the SR71!

Jeroen

[im_srini]

Originally Posted by TheStranger

For more in-depth knowledge on the SR-71 Blackbird, I would recommend a book ...
Sled Driver, written by former Blackbird pilot Brian Shul.
This book is awe-inspiring and vividly describes the experience from the pilot's POV.
This webpage posted above :
http://tribunist.com/technology/sr-7...d-speed-check/
It is an actual part taken from the book I mentioned.

A narration of this event by the man himself

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AyHH9G9et0

There's about a 100 kts discrepancy in the narration from the one in the book, but I don't think anyone's going to complain

[sun_king]

Originally Posted by D33-PAC

When people generally go to the USA, it's the same old yada yada New York City, Hollywood, blah blah blah they want to see. I was damn sure what I wanted to see ! And I fortunately had the chance to see one the greatest man made machine ever made.

Pima Air and Space Museum, Tucson, AZ for me. My daughter said I was melting and drooling when I first saw the #1 in my list of greatest airplanes ever made. After about 30 minutes of walking around it and savouring every possible inch of Kelly Johnson's genius, one of the museum volunteers approached me and soon he was in full technical flow, we walking around the airplane, imagining trisonic airflow patterns, the shock diamonds and he even explained how much the tires wore out per landing. An hour later my daughter actually asked him if she can have her father back as there are more of my favourite airplanes in the museum and we would like to reach home before midnight. I stubbornly refused to take pictures - maintained that I am not worthy to be pictured next to the Blackbird . Still she managed to take one.

Originally Posted by rohitoasis

The SR-71 along with Concorde would be two aeronautical gems which would be any enthusiast's dream to see once. You, sir are a very lucky person to see it in flesh.


I remember when i read about this in Skunkworks and being awestruck at the engineering marvel that this beauty is. Lovely book to read if you love anything about planes.

That book is gem. Anytime someone asks me to read a management book I suggest this to them, to show how engineering and management was done by the same people before the days management books were written! And making some of the greatest machines while they were at that.

Originally Posted by Jeroen

some reference have been made to books about the SR71; There are quite a few out there.

Here are two of my favourite books:

https://www.amazon.com/SR-71-Complet...&keywords=sr71

https://www.amazon.com/Lockheed-SR-7...&keywords=sr71

The Haynes “owner” workshop manual is pretty good. These days Haynes produces these manuals on all sort of stuff: I have one on Concorde and Apollo too. But they do Spitfire, Mustang and a whole host of other planes. I seem to recall one on teenagers as well! And of course, Cars. got a bunch of those too.

Jeroen

I'd suggest "Dark Eagles" by Curtis Peebles if you have not come across it, there is a Chapter on the Oxcart. Imagine why Kelly asked ""How the hell did a piece of aluminum get in this plane?"

The sheer awesomeness of the SR-71 is best explained by the quote "Though I Fly Through the Valley of Death I Shall Fear No Evil For I am at 80,000 Feet and Climbing."