Lockheed A-12 and SR-71 projects

JimK said:
FighterJock said:
So what was faster in terms of overall speed? A-12 or SR-71A? I have heard many stories over the years that the SR-71A was faster than the A-12, could someone clear this up for me. :-\
Click to expand...

From COMIREX-D-12.1/1 (Approved for release Date: Aug 2007)

I would interpret the equality of Mach numbers listed as a propulsion system limitation.
Click to expand...
From things posted by former Blackbird pilots on the HabuBrats SR71 facebook group, the airframe limitation was Mach 3.55, where the inlet spikes ran out of travel and the nose shock touches the ailerons. But usually the engines reached their max inlet temperature before then.
 
Ian33 said:
sferrin said:
Ian33 said:
sublight is back said:
What is the aircraft in figure 1 that goes Mach 6 @ 120k feet?
Click to expand...

The one that was flying way higher and and far faster than the SR71 as it was doing a sprint run across the USA would be my guess.

The crew mused iver the fact that their last high speed flight was indeed a cover for a classified airframe test.
Click to expand...

What? :eek: Do you have anymore details on this? Which crew? Book? Interview?
Click to expand...

In a nutshell, the crew were doing a sprint across the USA, down to the South West. The crew were in contact with a ground control team for the effort. When they asked for altitude and airspeed, the controller replied with a mach 4+ airspeed and 20,000 feet above them. When they queried the height and speed they got a flustered response with tbe Blackbirds correct details. They basically then said 'our last run, our bow out, was just a cover for a covert high speed test going on high over the tops of us.
Click to expand...
The last Blackbird flight was from LA to DC, not the other way around.
 
Scott Kenny said:
The last Blackbird flight was from LA to DC, not the other way around.
Click to expand...

If you mean the flight of 17972 from LA to DC in 68 minutes, that was on 6 March 1990. That was definitely not the last Blackbird flight. NASA flew them for a while afterwards, and then later in the 1990s there was the brief reactivation by the USAF. The last USAF flight was 10 October 1997. The last ever Blackbird flight was 9 October 1999, a NASA flight.
 
Huh high G and SR-71?!?

In general, the SR-71 was limited to 1.5 g and 45 degrees of bank while flying Mach 3 and greater; 2 g between 64,000 and 80,000 pounds of fuel; 2.5 g below 64,000 pounds of fuel; and 3.5 g at low altitude (below 50,000 feet) and less than 30,000 pounds of fuel.
Click to expand...

hushkit.net

DECLASSIFIED: Spying at Mach 3+: our Interview with SR-71 Blackbird pilot reveals how US lured North Korea to shoot missiles

From the 1960s until the 1990s the US spied on whoever it liked with impunity from the snapping cameras and greedy sensors of the fastest aeroplane ever to take off from a runway, the spectacular S…
hushkit.net hushkit.net

Just remind yourself that those G-load are what you would get out of GA (Cessna 172 etc...).
 
TomcatViP said:
Huh high G and SR-71?!?
Click to expand...

Everything's relative, I suppose! Relevant part of Frank Murray's excellent Oxcart talk linked below (59m:14s or so). If you haven't watched it before it's well worth setting aside the time.

"It's a long skinny thing, built like a butterfly. It is not very strong; it's only a 2g airframe. 2g! Get that! You know, you're pullin' more'n that pulling up at the stop-light down here at Sears! So that's not much."
Click to expand...

 
Last edited:
SOC said:
Pg1.jpg


Pg15.jpg
Click to expand...
It is hard to read, but the study also proposed to replace the SR-71 Blackbird's Pratt & Whitney J58 afterburning turbojets with either the Pratt & Whitney F100 or General Electric F101 afterburning turbofans as shown above in the lower-right text box ["NEWER ENGINES (F-100, F-101)"].
 
Last edited:
The split plan view shown above looks like it came directly from the Revell YF.12 model kit instruction sheet slightly modified around the nose but still identifiable (right down to the inner wing 'probes') :eek:
 
Last edited:
'like' but not the same
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20231109_015650_YouTube.jpg
    Screenshot_20231109_015650_YouTube.jpg
    889 KB · Views: 154

Attachments

  • waA12-54.jpg
    waA12-54.jpg
    136.8 KB · Views: 105
  • waA12-55.jpg
    waA12-55.jpg
    177.9 KB · Views: 78
  • waA12-120.jpg
    waA12-120.jpg
    161.2 KB · Views: 79
  • waA12-129.jpg
    waA12-129.jpg
    112 KB · Views: 75
  • waA12-128.jpg
    waA12-128.jpg
    90.1 KB · Views: 84
Last edited:
blackkite said:
Hi!
www.thedrive.com

SR-71 Blackbird’s Predecessor Looked Even Cooler With Canards

An early design of the SR-71's predecessor had massive canard foreplanes. This is what it would've looked like if it had flown.
www.thedrive.com www.thedrive.com

walk-around photos of Lockheed SR-71 & A-12

walk-around photos of Lockheed SR-71 & A-12
nabe3saviation.web.fc2.com
Click to expand...
The tip vortices generated by those canards would be perfectly positioned to disrupt the airflow into the engines and cause loss of thrust and frequent unstarts.

Hence their disappearance as soon as any real engineer looked at the plan.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom