SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > General Topics
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-22-07, 02:43 PM   #16
dean_acheson
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Midwest - USA
Posts: 1,057
Downloads: 42
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fatty
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by bookworm_020
Robotic's, taking the fun out of flying

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
and even better, sometimes we do. besides, nobody likes to admit, esp. tinpot dictators, that they CAN'T do anything about it.
dean_acheson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-07, 04:46 PM   #17
Sailor Steve
Eternal Patrol
 
Sailor Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: High in the mountains of Utah
Posts: 50,369
Downloads: 745
Uploads: 249


Default

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?
__________________
“Never do anything you can't take back.”
—Rocky Russo
Sailor Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-07, 07:10 PM   #18
dean_acheson
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Midwest - USA
Posts: 1,057
Downloads: 42
Uploads: 0
Default

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 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-07, 07:13 PM   #19
dean_acheson
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Midwest - USA
Posts: 1,057
Downloads: 42
Uploads: 0
Default

that really wasn't an answer, but it was kinda cool.
dean_acheson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-07, 08:48 PM   #20
moose1am
Frogman
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 303
Downloads: 0
Uploads: 0
Default

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.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 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?
__________________
Regards,

Moose1am

My avatar resembles the moderator as they are the ones that control the avatar on my page.
moose1am is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-07, 11:25 AM   #21
Sailor Steve
Eternal Patrol
 
Sailor Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: High in the mountains of Utah
Posts: 50,369
Downloads: 745
Uploads: 249


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dean_acheson
that really wasn't an answer, but it was kinda cool.
Yes it was.

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.
__________________
“Never do anything you can't take back.”
—Rocky Russo
Sailor Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-07, 11:50 AM   #22
TLAM Strike
Navy Seal
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Rochester, New York
Posts: 8,633
Downloads: 29
Uploads: 6


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve
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.
__________________


TLAM Strike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-07, 11:52 AM   #23
Sailor Steve
Eternal Patrol
 
Sailor Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: High in the mountains of Utah
Posts: 50,369
Downloads: 745
Uploads: 249


Default

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.
__________________
“Never do anything you can't take back.”
—Rocky Russo
Sailor Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-07, 01:24 PM   #24
JSLTIGER
The Old Man
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Parkland, FL, USA
Posts: 1,437
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
__________________
Thor:
Intel Core i7 4770K|ASUS Z87Pro|32GB DDR3 RAM|11GB EVGA GeForce RTX 2080Ti Black|256GB Crucial M4 SSD+2TB WD HDD|4X LG BD-RE|32" Acer Predator Z321QU 165Hz G-Sync (2540x1440)|Logitech Z-323 2.1 Sound|Win 10 Pro

Explorer (MSI GL63 8RE-629 Laptop):
Intel Core i7 8750H|16GB DDR4 RAM|6GB GeForce GTX 1060|128GB SSD+1TB HDD|15.6" Widescreen (1920x1080)|Logitech R-20 2.1 Sound|Win 10 Home
JSLTIGER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-07, 04:50 PM   #25
Mush Martin
Eternal Patrol
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 4,398
Downloads: 4
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve
Quote:
Originally Posted by dean_acheson
that really wasn't an answer, but it was kinda cool.
Yes it was.

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
__________________
RIP Mush



Tutorial
Mush Martin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-07, 06:30 PM   #26
Sailor Steve
Eternal Patrol
 
Sailor Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: High in the mountains of Utah
Posts: 50,369
Downloads: 745
Uploads: 249


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JSLTIGER
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?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mush Martin
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.
__________________
“Never do anything you can't take back.”
—Rocky Russo
Sailor Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-07, 07:30 PM   #27
JSLTIGER
The Old Man
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Parkland, FL, USA
Posts: 1,437
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

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

http://www.designation-systems.net/u...ignations.html
__________________
Thor:
Intel Core i7 4770K|ASUS Z87Pro|32GB DDR3 RAM|11GB EVGA GeForce RTX 2080Ti Black|256GB Crucial M4 SSD+2TB WD HDD|4X LG BD-RE|32" Acer Predator Z321QU 165Hz G-Sync (2540x1440)|Logitech Z-323 2.1 Sound|Win 10 Pro

Explorer (MSI GL63 8RE-629 Laptop):
Intel Core i7 8750H|16GB DDR4 RAM|6GB GeForce GTX 1060|128GB SSD+1TB HDD|15.6" Widescreen (1920x1080)|Logitech R-20 2.1 Sound|Win 10 Home
JSLTIGER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-07, 03:22 PM   #28
Sailor Steve
Eternal Patrol
 
Sailor Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: High in the mountains of Utah
Posts: 50,369
Downloads: 745
Uploads: 249


Default

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.
__________________
“Never do anything you can't take back.”
—Rocky Russo
Sailor Steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-07, 08:57 AM   #29
Tronics
A-ganger
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 78
Downloads: 44
Uploads: 0
Default

[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.
Tronics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-07, 09:12 AM   #30
dean_acheson
Ace of the Deep
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Midwest - USA
Posts: 1,057
Downloads: 42
Uploads: 0
Default

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

Damn, I love this place.
dean_acheson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.