It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Holy Moly! sr-71 top speed is Mach 14 (leaked document)

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 23 2006 @ 11:35 AM
link   
As a Lockheed brat, the fastest speed I've heard for this (unofficially) was Mach 3.8...though often it was said as "just shy of Mach 4".... Of course, that could be boasting, who knows...

Thing is, Mach 14 is ludicrous... Even on routine flights of around Mach 3, it would require plenty of maintenance to repair the superficial damage to the airframe... Above Mach 4, given the materials....the plane would simply start to melt...even if the engines could manage it before blowing out.




posted on Feb, 24 2006 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
So I guess that means you're firmly in the "Pilots are liars to make the plane look better" camp.


VERY, VERY firmly in the pilots talk bs to make their planes look better.


So your saying NASA wouldn't need to look at performing the modification because the SR-71 could already do faster speeds - explain the reasoning behind that please? Why did NASA look at it then?



posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 08:10 PM
link   
with regards to the speed discussion for the SR71, some say mach 3 or 4 as the top speed and some suggest mach 14 which seems unusually high and has been essentially rejected with some good supporting facts ie engineering limits and temperatures

but lets consider altitude, denser air based on lower alittudes would lmit performance based on engineering limits but higher altitudes with rarified air would be more suited to higher speeds if not orbital velocity.

So my theory goes like this, if mach 14 is to be achieved the aircraft would need to be in an extremely high altitude if not a low orbit type situation

I have seen a photo that shows two SR71's at altitude with pretty much the entire US continent below them, I wonder what height this would be and I would be inclned to say that at this height and rarified air, it may well be doing orbital speeds of mach 14 but only in such a situation



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Why is this thread still alive? The question has been definitively answered.

The SR-71 had a design cruise speed of Mach 3.2 or approximately 2,100 mph. It could cruise a little faster or slower depending on outside air temperature because it was limited by structural heating factors and a maximum compressor inlet temperature 427 degrees centigrade (C).

According to SR-71 pilot Richard Graham: "The design Mach number of the SR-71 is 3.2 Mach. When authorized by the Commander, speeds up to Mach 3.3 may be flown if the CIT limit of 427 degrees C. is not exceeded. I have heard of crews reaching 3.5 Mach inadvertently, but that is the absolute maximum I am aware of."

Fastest known Blackbird flights:
YF-12A (60-6936), Mach 3.14 (2,070 mph), 1 May 1965
A-12 (60-6928), Mach 3.29 (2,171 mph), 8 May 1965
SR-71A (61-7972), Mach 3.32 (2,193 mph), 27 July 1976

So, there it it is. The airframe and powerplant of the SR-71 were optimized for Mach 3.2. There is no chance the airplane could attain Mach 14.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 07:40 PM
link   
we are only bound by the limitations of the mind, yours are set and thats fine but to crush the speculation of the mind of others that may have moved the limit slighthly higher than yours is a bit off is it not.

But with humble hat in hand i must confess my erroneous ways and concede that whatever is printed and aired on TV etc must by your logic be absolute and correct thus my humble apologies and assurances that i will accept all printed material etc as fact with no option of investigating options.

Now that you have sorted this issue out once and for all, could you now address the china problem as seen on tv ie is it smog or just mist as the officials say, Im confused, please help?



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 11:14 PM
link   
One of my professors in College was an SR-71 pilot out of beal airforce base in california in the 60's and 70's i believe. i'll have to ask him sometime how fast they go
but, it wouldn't surprise me if it went that fast.



Keeper



posted on Aug, 15 2008 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Keeper of Kheb
One of my professors in College was an SR-71 pilot out of beal airforce base in california in the 60's and 70's i believe. i'll have to ask him sometime how fast they go
but, it wouldn't surprise me if it went that fast.
Keeper


Lets just hope you did read SH's post above your and ask your old prof a question based off of that info and the fact that the engines would start to be hit by the compression ways at much above mach 3.5 therefore cause unstarts and compression stalls. Please people its not really classified anymore why it went this fast and not faster. For your shake Keeper don't look silly


[edit on 15-8-2008 by Canada_EH]



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Some facts most don't know about the SR-71. At high altitude It can cruise at around 4200 MPH and kick back to 5% useage of fuel. After one refueling at 50,000 ft can circle the earth. This is in ramjet mode and it is above 125000 feet. The 5% fueling is caused because of the low air friction at the very high altitiudes. After landing it leaks oil all over
the place. In Spokane Washington when it lands it would melt the snow around it at about 100 ft. from the heat.



posted on Sep, 8 2008 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadowhawk
Why is this thread still alive? The question has been definitively answered.


Because someone had the bright idea of allowing anonymous posts, ever since it was introduced all we seem to get are thread necro's from them


I've lost count how many posts have dredged up threads from the depths, only to add nothing, add a silly comment, or to take random pot-shots at people who gave up caring years ago..

Oh well..



posted on Sep, 9 2008 @ 02:31 AM
link   
This should be quite easy, as the hull of the SR-71 is cooled down by it's own fuel.

The issue is this:
Speed + air = friction = heat.

What is the estimated heat level on titanium hull at speed of Mach 14

When at mach (close to 4) is above 400 degrees...

So that alone should be a tell-tell that this is not possible, at all with titanium hull atleast..

[edit on 9-9-2008 by Phoebus]



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:05 PM
link   
the real speed of th sr71 is mach 3.3 if it went up to mach 14 it would ter apart and th pilot would be crushed from the g-force unless it went out of the atmosphere. but it cant the top altitude is 80,257.86 ft witch is stil in the Earths atmosphere bearly but you still feal the g-force and the after burners still work.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:14 PM
link   
Fuel had nothing to do with it as you think it does. It had everything to do with how much could be put into the engines when functioning in ram jet mode so as to not feed the "fire" to hot and destroy the compressor blades.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 03:44 PM
link   
SR-71 going Mach 14? One word: Bullcrap.



posted on Oct, 19 2008 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by RichardPrice
SR-71 going Mach 14? One word: Bullcrap.

Richard, I Totally agree.

I read the original post as well as the sourced article and quite frankly I felt pity for the poor bum running that website who is either extremely gullible or willing to fabricate an embarassing pile of literary manure in order to gain more hit's on his otherwise dull conspiracy website.

Blah - I feel like I have to take a shower now...



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Since it can be proven this is crap why not lock a thread that is just wasting time on here and wasting our efforts to keep correcting?



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Two facets that no one has dicussed here are these

1) MHD/ EHD Propultion - IF you read up on how this works, this form of propultion is deff in use in a few of the planes mentioned besides the sr-71.
This link should explain the rudments to anyone interested .. this isnt science fiction people like me play with this # for fun to learn new principals and expand our horizons..
JNL LABS PLASMA PAGE


2) Inertial Dampers - IF your going to accelerate to great speeds wouldn't you think they have some way of lessening the g forces on the human body.........

patented 4123675

A viscous-fluid inertia damper, which damper comprises a housing composed of a nonferromagnetic material and having a chamber therein, a seismic mass containing a permanent magnet disposed in the housing chamber and in a closely spaced-apart relationship with the internal wall surface of the chamber, means to couple the housing to a dynamic element whose energy is to be dampened, and a ferrofluid of selected viscosity in the remaining volume of the chamber, the ferrofluid distributed generally uniformly in the volume, the magnetic saturation of the ferrofluid by the magnetic field of the permanent magnetic levitating the seismic mass in the damper, and the viscosity of the ferrofluid in the magnetic field providing "a means to dissipate energy from the dynamic system through viscous shear forces in the ferrofluid disposed between the wall surface of the chamber and the seismic mass."!!!!!!!!!!!!


wrangle your head around those two then re evaulate the clamis of glowing ships whipping around our skies such as the " gravity assisted b-2" look at the b1 and some shots acctually show the pads "ehd skin"

[edit on 20-10-2008 by Localjoe3]

[edit on 20-10-2008 by Localjoe3]



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 11:01 AM
link   
1. Plasma propulsion is NOT in the SR-71. Please, please, please do not go down the road of insisting it is.


2. Inertial dampers (aka artificial gravity wells) do not exist in anything outside lab conditions at the moment. Even those within laboratories create a electro-gravitational field that is barely measurable.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   
So if my calculation is correct, it can go 9,494.8 mph. This would be too fast for known structural integrity. For that speed to be attained in atmosphere it would need an anti gravity type of cushion around it or somehow be able to suspend known laws of physics to keep it all together.

The only things I know of that can travel that fast in our atmosphere are the UFOs that have been clocked at that speed by radar returns. So unless we have back engineered the technology by now (which I doubt), I think it is a false "leak".



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Localjoe3
Two facets that no one has dicussed here are these

1) MHD/ EHD Propultion -



Same old rubbish - cranks and nutcases, nothing more.



2) Inertial Dampers - IF your going to accelerate to great speeds wouldn't you think they have some way of lessening the g forces on the human body.........


Yeah, they simply accelerate slower....

Just because the aircraft ends up at Mach 14 (just to take an example, there is no way I believe the SR-71 can do it) doesn't mean the acceleration to get there has to be high G - they simply accelerate at a lower G for a longer time and they *still* get to a high Mach number...

Some people over think things too much.



posted on Oct, 20 2008 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Richard-

Please refrain from calling me a crank or nutcase.. im a 24 year old network engineer that dabbles in motors and em technology for fun..

AS far as the blackbird reaching mach 14 i agree thats probably hogwash but the point im making is not... Build a lifter its just foil wire and a hv power supply from a florescent light ballast.. none of that is imaginary stuff. juice the thing up and it lifts off the ground. It also works in a vaccum meaning that its not just an ion wind pushing the craft..

The MHD SKIN i talked about is present on some aircraft. Thats the evolution of the lifter technology take something put it in the air and reduce its resistance via the mhd skin.

Why you mock me without building a simple demo for your desk as i have is beyond me, or at least research the principals of a capacitor more under high voltage stress you would see i have a sound base and am not proposing flying saucers.


Ferro fluid is sweet get some play with it and stimulate with an ac field ...or a pulsed dc one .. youtube if youd like to see it in action. The technology is there for the rudiments .. and its in the public sector....


Why call me a crank ? I figured id just share the knowledge id gained playing with these "proof's of concept" And reading countless patents and replicating them... thanks man




[edit on 20-10-2008 by Localjoe3]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join