An SR-72 in the works?

[bradclark1]

Ten years after the Air Force retired the SR-71 spy plane, Lockheed Martin’s legendary Skunk Works appears to be back at work developing a new Mach-6 reconnaissance plane, sources said.
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/06/airforce_sr72_070617/

[Onkel Neal]

4000 mph ... wow. But unmanned? Where's the fun in that? :(
http://www.airforcetimes.com/xml/news/2007/06/airforce_sr72_070617/070615_af_sr72_hp.JPG

[bookworm_020]

Robotic's, taking the fun out of flying:x

Going that fast at that seed is going to be hard to achive, and to stay stealthy is going to be near impossible. I don't envy the aircraft designers!

[CCIP]

Robotic's, taking the fun out of flying:x

Going that fast at that seed is going to be hard to achive, and to stay stealthy is going to be near impossible. I don't envy the aircraft designers!
But do you need to stay stealthy at a speed that is faster and higher than almost any SAM in existence out there anyway? :hmm:

[Mush Martin]

assumably Scramjet and Unmanned , prior to SR71 they did a single
engine 3000 mph reconasaince drone.
It shows lineage with tacit blue I think
in the engine/body/tail config , Lifting body also, I think.

the suggestion of heat signature being problematic is interesting.
Diamond edges on a diamond shape might do. plus a cold air bypass
injection into the exhaust.

I think it may be detectable by a type of geo stationary sattelite and ground
station network of composite sensrs. in a Bi Static array.

[fatty]

Robotic's, taking the fun out of flying:x

Going that fast at that seed is going to be hard to achive, and to stay stealthy is going to be near impossible. I don't envy the aircraft designers!
But do you need to stay stealthy at a speed that is faster and higher than almost any SAM in existence out there anyway? :hmm:

Sometimes we don't like to stir up diplomatic frustrations by allowing the specimens to know they're under the microscope :D

[JSLTIGER]

OK...my only problem...if its so top-secret, how come we know about it?

[Letum]

Why dont they just develop a missile with the survelance equipment in? :hmm:

And didin't spy planes die in the age of the satalite?

[Oberon]

:hmm: :rock: :rock: :hmm:

I see they've learnt some things from Aurora...that's looking good. Nice design!

[ASWnut101]

Why dont they just develop a missile with the survelance equipment in? :hmm:

And didin't spy planes die in the age of the satalite?


To keep others from obtaining the technology you just launched at them, not to mention preventing a major global-thermonuclear war (seriously, one may think the missile is an incoming ICBM/SLBM and start a nuke fest).


And there is no substitute for the stealth of the aircraft. Satilites are watched by other satillites, ect.


***************

It just needs to be manned, though. That would be amazing to ride in.

[Tronics]

No spy planes did not die with the age of the 3 meter satelite resolution.

Satelites are great for getting the big picture, however the handful of super-awesome-mega-resolution satelites are constantly baing timeshared by almost all US agencies and the like.

When I was on my way out of Chairforce intel the baseline standard satelite resolution was about 9 feet (3 meters), now I hear that the new baseline is soon to be 6 feet (2 meters) with a a handful of super-awesome-mega-resolution satalites almost having a 2 foot margin now.

Soon they will get to under a foot which is nice because it can provide nice spiffy super high res (5+ Gigabyte) reconnisance images down to even counting the shingles on the roof of your house.

The only problem for this is that these satalites are the far minority in their fields and are constantly fought over by federal agencies and interdepartments due to their ovbious value.

Also when considering orbital satelites those have primetime windows of opportunity as they coast effortlessly over out heads about every 100 minutes or so which is usually the amount of time that it takes them to complete an orbit.

So there are times when big brother has to switch his glasses out to another pair as it rounds the bend over the horizon of the specified area.

So in short satelites are great for getting daily or even hourly updates on extremely high priority intel targets, however for continous survailence or more immediate options you turn to either drones, planes, and finally men.

Each one has a cost in both dectivity, time and risk.

With spyplanes usually the time to target time is very low due to their speed, however this speed also sometimes compromises their stealth if they are going to fly over a target with a even a 'semi-modern' radar defence/warning system, plus their potential lost cost is the highest.

Drones on the other hand usually have a moderate to long time until target depending on their deployment positions, however their small size and slowish speed usually make them stealthy enough to get to the target area mostly undetced and get a few minutes worth of constant survailence before they are noticed. They are moderately cheap and totally expendable. Most now carry a payload or are themselves a payload that can be used as an impromptu bomb if a good enough of atarget situation arises.

Men or more specifically recon specalists range from dedicated special forces recon units such as the USMC Force Recon to basic 1-2 man USAF Far Area Recon jump teams...they usually take the most time to get to a target, but potentially have the lowest risk of detection, however their cost is high, (more then the drone but less then the spyplane), because where as men are expendable experience is not.

[Letum]

What a well written post!
thanks!

[tycho102]

:hmm: :rock: :rock: :hmm:
I see they've learnt some things from Aurora.

Refueling liquid methane is risky business and how difficult it is to run a pulse-jet at low altitudes and speeds.


SR-72 has a nice UAV design. I wonder if it is autonomous or semi-autonomous, because they'd better have a plan if EMP or a solar flare knocks out our satellites. I imagine the flight-profile is easy enough as long as it doesn't need refueling.

[Heibges]

How many of the Subcontractors are in Murtha's district?

[bradclark1]

How many of the Subcontractors are in Murtha's district?
Somehow I don't think that has anything to do with it. This time anyway.

[dean_acheson]

Robotic's, taking the fun out of flying:x

Going that fast at that seed is going to be hard to achive, and to stay stealthy is going to be near impossible. I don't envy the aircraft designers!
But do you need to stay stealthy at a speed that is faster and higher than almost any SAM in existence out there anyway? :hmm:

Sometimes we don't like to stir up diplomatic frustrations by allowing the specimens to know they're under the microscope :D

and even better, sometimes we do. ;) besides, nobody likes to admit, esp. tinpot dictators, that they CAN'T do anything about it.

[Sailor Steve]

Pop quiz: does anyone know (besides me, of course) why it's SR-72? You know there was an SR-71, but was there an SR-70? How about SR-1?

[dean_acheson]

HOW THE SR-71 CAME TO BE
USAF Col. (ret.) Richard Graham might want to check the White House telephone and visitor logs (AW&ST Feb. 12, p. 25).
I was part of a USAF System Command task force in 1962-63 that prepared a report on the configuration of the RS-70 weapons suite. At that stage, it was to be an untasked penetration bomber that could perform its own reconnaissance and then strike at targets of opportunity.
The final report was assembled and briefed to a large group of officers, includ- ing Gen. Curtis LeMay. During the briefing, LeMay became more and more uncomfortable hearing his new toy called the RS-70. Before the day was out, he ordered that all copies of the report and working papers be collected and forwarded to his office. The intent was to quash the report and close out the name RS-70 in favor of his more aggressive preference, SR-70.
The scuttlebutt was that LeMay went to great lengths to be sure the designation never again saw the light of day. When President Johnson's speech writers prepared their material surfacing the RS-71, they apparently spoke with System Command. Reportedly, when LeMay saw this version, he lobbied Johnson to get the "delivery text" changed. What LeMay did not know was that several of us had shipped the classified report to our home stations. I had a copy with the RS-70 cover until I left the civil service some years later. James T. Fulton
Newport Beach, Calif.

[dean_acheson]

that really wasn't an answer, but it was kinda cool.

[moose1am]

No the spy planes never died in the presence of satellites. They got even more important. The satellite's orbit is predictable and things on the ground can be moved when a satellite is know to be overhead. A spy plane can take off and hover over any area for a much longer period of time

The new SR72 can fly at 100,000ft altitude and at 4000 mph. Don't have to be very stealty at that altitude and speed. And it's said to be capable of taking care of the Chinese antsatellite weapons. Humm. So any satellite that can detect this bird may be a target of this bird, not the other way around.

You can bet that if this plane is being talked about in the open now that's it's been around and operational for a long time now. You don't retire a SR71 that is successful without having a replacement ready to go.

Why dont they just develop a missile with the survelance equipment in? :hmm:

And didin't spy planes die in the age of the satalite?

[Sailor Steve]

that really wasn't an answer, but it was kinda cool.
Yes it was.:sunny:

The 'RS' and 'SR' designations are an extension of the old bomber designators. 'RS-70' was the XB-70 Valkerie when tested as a photo plane. So I guess the SR-72 should properly be an extension of the new designator system, and should probably be the SR-3.

Of course I still haven't found out exactly where F-117 came from.

[TLAM Strike]

Of course I still haven't found out exactly where F-117 came from. Most likly has something to do with the F(B)-111. Since both were ground attack jets given a 'F' letter to stroke the egos of their pilots who didn't want people to think they were really flying bombers. :doh:

[Sailor Steve]

The problem is the old designator ended in 1962, and it ended with that very F-111. There's nothing in between 111 and 117, and given the date it should actually have one of the newer designators, which at this time are somewhere between 35 and 45, depending on what contracts congress has awarded so far.

I hate it when they cheat.

And what ever happened to F-19? It got skipped.

[JSLTIGER]

The problem is the old designator ended in 1962, and it ended with that very F-111. There's nothing in between 111 and 117, and given the date it should actually have one of the newer designators, which at this time are somewhere between 35 and 45, depending on what contracts congress has awarded so far.

I hate it when they cheat.

And what ever happened to F-19? It got skipped.

Actually, that's not entirely accurate. F-112 through F-116 were used to designate Soviet planes used for evaluation after they were received from Egypt following the signing of the Camp David Accords. F-117 was the next number in the sequence and was used to hide the true nature of the aircraft.

As far as the designator F-19 goes, it was skipped, as Northrop requested that the F-5E successor, the F-20, be given the number 20 to represent a "new generation" of fighter planes.

[Mush Martin]

that really wasn't an answer, but it was kinda cool. Yes it was.:sunny:

The 'RS' and 'SR' designations are an extension of the old bomber designators. 'RS-70' was the XB-70 Valkerie when tested as a photo plane. So I guess the SR-72 should properly be an extension of the new designator system, and should probably be the SR-3.

Of course I still haven't found out exactly where F-117 came from.

I think the F designation was just a misdirection attempt.
it is after all a shortlegged bomber with a fairly limited payload.
M

[Sailor Steve]

F-112 through F-116 were used to designate Soviet planes used for evaluation after they were received from Egypt following the signing of the Camp David Accords. F-117 was the next number in the sequence and was used to hide the true nature of the aircraft.
That's interesting. I have a couple of books on the development of fighters and they never mention that. Can you show me which planes got which numbers?

I think the F designation was just a misdirection attempt.
it is after all a shortlegged bomber with a fairly limited payload.
I completely agree. Even a bomber designator would have been too much. I would have used an A-for-attack designator. But then, I'm not very sneaky - I like my numbers all lined up nice and neat.

[JSLTIGER]

Most of the reports are fairly unspecific...here's one site:

http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/coverdesignations.html

[Sailor Steve]

Fascinating! Thanks for that. I've read books which suggest call signs ("project 117") and such. It looks like he's done plenty of research, so, even though he himself admits it's mostly rumor, it's still a better start than any I've seen.

[Tronics]

[quote=moose1am]
You don't retire a SR71 that is successful without having a replacement ready to go.[/quote=moose1am]

Actually they've hauled one out of retirement a few times.

After Desert Storm there was a renewed debate on the progress of R&D regarding potential SR-71 replacements, because apparently most of the contracts to date failed to meet certain specifications....mostly budget specifications.

So there were a handful of contracts issued yet again, to the same companies, in the 1990's for potential SR-71 replacements, only one was completed before the Clinton Administration and it was Lockheed's, susposedly it had more or less the same airframe, but then again the signature SR-71 airframe was kicked around since 1960 in one way or another.

Anyways things changed in the midst of the early ninties, and I'm not trying to turn this into a political discussion but it will probably end up that way so I'll just try to state some semi-factual observations.

Bill Clinton believed that the Cold War was over, as many others did, few people forsaw the problems that would happen with 'rogue state scenarios' and crackpot dictatorships rising from the ashes of the Warsaw, and even fewer people cared.

Military spending went from a 'global deterrent' to a 'global pain in the ass' overnight, everything that was deemed unnecessary was cut, immediately and in some cases without informing people.

There was a mass exodus of personnel from all levels in all fields, and as they went into the private sector they inadvertantly and vastly expanded on the situation of military based contracting...which in a twisted irony costs the government more today then ever before.

I left once and resigned...mainly because the USAF came out of the blue and threw a $90,000 resign package at me when I was particularly having a hard time finding stable employment because no one was then (1998) willing to accepet the notion of Information Security as a job field...lol. I left again more recently in 05 after being totally fedup with the entire process but thats another story.

[dean_acheson]

SS- one cool thread, with some really cool posts.

Damn, I love this place. :)

[TLAM Strike]

F-112 through F-116 were used to designate Soviet planes used for evaluation after they were received from Egypt following the signing of the Camp David Accords. F-117 was the next number in the sequence and was used to hide the true nature of the aircraft.
That's interesting. I have a couple of books on the development of fighters and they never mention that. Can you show me which planes got which numbers? YF-110 was the MiG-21 and the YF-113 was the MiG-23

Also see this:
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/printthread.php?t=62776
http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/coverdesignations.html

Oops beat me to it I see JSLTIGER. ;)

[bradclark1]

Military spending went from a 'global deterrent' to a 'global pain in the ass' overnight, everything that was deemed unnecessary was cut, immediately and in some cases without informing people.
I think I saw a show on the 71 on the History channel that it cost $1,000,000+ per flight not counting the engine replacement every three or four flight's or so.

[Sailor Steve]

YF-110 was the MiG-21 and the YF-113 was the MiG-23
Well, except for the part where the F-110 designation was applied to the Air Force version of the F-4H3 (later F-4C) Phantom II, which the AF intended to nickname Spectre.

[TLAM Strike]

YF-110 was the MiG-21 and the YF-113 was the MiG-23
Well, except for the part where the F-110 designation was applied to the Air Force version of the F-4H3 (later F-4C) Phantom II, which the AF intended to nickname Spectre. Talk about disinformation its used for both! :damn:

Well YF-110 is used for the MiG-21 while F-110A is used for the F-4. :huh:

[Sailor Steve]

AND there's no direct evidence that either of them was ever actually an official designator.