This is the amazing Lockheed Martin SR-72—the space Blackbird

page: 3
37
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


You ever hear of a C-5 refueling a KC-135?
www.airliners.net...



we once refueled KC-135's with a C-5, it was cool we carried 330,000lbs of gas and serviced up 3 KC-135's during an operational mission. they wanted them in the air to refuel fighter and support aircraft , so they could be on station the whole time in was decided that a c-5 would keep filling them up with gas that way they would be available to other aircraft and not have to return for refueling on the ground.




posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigburgh
 


Zaph could probably set things straight, I'm just recalling something Boomer135 mentioned in another thread (still searching for it) that the AF still uses tankers with separate tanks with different fuel types.



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Looking up the kc-135q. But not having luck confirming how many a still in use. Only that it refueled the F-117 nighthawk. But that wouldn't add up if sr-71 was the only craft using JP-7.



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


OK. Thanks..



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 02:56 PM
link   
S+F!!!! Finally some more real news about the successor
and pictures! If they're saying mach 6 and 100k ft, I wonder what the real celiing of speed and height would be? This also makes me wonder how much further advanced we are now! My guess would be pretty much maybe.... mach 7-8? 120k ft? who knows!



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Could this bird be the reason for the extended runway out at Groom?

or...

Where would a platform like this be stationed/based?



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by TXRabbit
 


My guess, for whatever weight it has, is that these would be stationed at a major bomber and surveillance site like where the U2s are currently. Keep in mind, we still have no clue as to required length for runway or any other special requirements necessary for these craft



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I wouldn't be surprised if there are several working units already in operation and I am pretty sure that I saw this flying twice over the past years - dart-like shape.

With the surprising quick launch of DDG-1000 and now this, I wonder what's going on? Why suddenly all the openness and putting info into the public view?



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


There was another reference by Boomer135 but this is what I found so far:




The KC-135Q and later the converted KC-135T models refueled the SR-71 and other aircraft that burned JP-7 fuel. The tanker never burned the JP-7 that I know of. They always burned JP-8 with the R model engine. The T model was designed specifically to stop the tanker pilots from burning the fuel or transferring the fuel from the body tanks to the wing tanks. So the JP-7 (and another type used after the SR) was used specifically for high speed aircraft. The KC135RT is a different aircraft that a KC-135T. Its the refuelable KC-135's I believe.



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by flyandi
 


There's always the probability its been running for 10-15 years already... How long was the SR 71 in use prior to its public unveiling? what about the B2 and 117? I realize those were in wartime usage, so they were more than likely seen more often over the skies and the government felt that releasing information would not be much of a burden to them at the time



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


How the ef would you slow something down when traveling @ that kind of speed!?

mach 6 =
2 041.74 m / s

roughly 5000mph

Just coast it down to 1000mph and use air brakes?

Earth, Radius
3,959 miles (6,371 km)

-VE
edit on 1-11-2013 by VectorEquilibrium because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   

flyandi
I wouldn't be surprised if there are several working units already in operation and I am pretty sure that I saw this flying twice over the past years - dart-like shape.

With the surprising quick launch of DDG-1000 and now this, I wonder what's going on? Why suddenly all the openness and putting info into the public view?



To send a message.

FEAR US!!!

Basically that's why.



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Zaphod58
Aurora never existed. Period.


Heresy!

Circumstantial evidence suggests it did, and if you think about it then it could well have been the testbed for this project


TR3-B...now that never existed at all...



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Sammamishman
 


Here is the other Boomer135 reference I was looking for:




As for the F-35's, the Air Force is correct when it came to refueling them for the first time, I think it was around 2009-2010 or something like that, officially. However, we've refueled the X-35 numerous times while deployed to Edwards AFB. Really not much changed between the X-35 and the F-35 so technically we were refueling the X-35 starting around 2000. So 12 years later, were still doing test flights and night air refueling with this JSF. In those 12 years, imagine what has came out in the mean time. If the F-35 is based on 80's and 90's technology, just imagine what we are refueling up there right now...Remember we still have "T" models in the United States inventory to separate different fuels onboard the KC-135. Think about that for a second...


I was mistaken when referencing the "Q" model. It was the "T" model I was thinking of.



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   

VectorEquilibrium
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


How the ef would you slow something down when traveling @ that kind of speed!?

mach 6 =
2 041.74 m / s

roughly 5000mph

Just coast it down to 1000mph and use air brakes?

Earth, Radius
3,959 miles (6,371 km)

-VE
edit on 1-11-2013 by VectorEquilibrium because: (no reason given)


Lol. The visual you just gave me. But if...If this craft is un-manned. Then I guess there may not be to much worry.
Otherwise start slowing down over Bermuda and coast in. It was done with the space shuttle. I'm not saying hit the air brakes and rip off the wings. But it has been done.
edit on 1-11-2013 by Bigburgh because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigburgh
 


Yes, the Space Shuttle did large "S" turns on re-entry to bleed off energy and it was travelling a lot faster than mach 6 on re-entry...like 17,500mph or mach 25.

www.grc.nasa.gov...
edit on 1-11-2013 by Sammamishman because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 



What happened to IG? Got sick of being accused of "leaking classified data" all of the time?



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by grey580
 


Utter BS. There was a proposal for a KC-5, that never even hit the wind tunnel. Most KC-135s couldn't refuel in flight. They could only offload.



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 04:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigburgh
 


The Q model was not JP7 specific. It was the only one to use it, because they had extra nav equipment on board to allow the Blackbird to find them, but it could carry any fuel in use.



posted on Nov, 1 2013 @ 04:01 PM
link   

intrepid
Yeah, damn sexy aircraft. My though is, shouldn't they complete the F-35 first that countries have paid billions for?


Completely different missions, not related to one another.


CallYourBluff
Yay, more war machines. USA USA USA.


If you'd like to concentrate on rescuing animal strays or elementary school bake sales there are probably forums for that. This one isn't it.



top topics
 
37
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join