Slashdot Log In
USAF Developing New "SR-72" Supersonic Spy?
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Wed Jun 20, 2007 05:16 PM
from the next-comes-high-altitude-flak-cannons dept.
from the next-comes-high-altitude-flak-cannons dept.
Kadin2048 writes "According to an Air Force Times article, the famed Lockheed Martin 'Skunk Works' may be hard at work on a new supersonic spy plane (with 'artist concept') for the U.S. military, to replace the SR-71 'Blackbird' retired a decade ago. Dubbed by some the SR-72, the jet would be unmanned and travel at about 4,000 MPH at as much as 100,000 feet, with 'transcontinental' range. Some have speculated that new high-speed spy planes could be a U.S. response to anti-satellite weapons deployed by China, in order to preserve reconnaissance capabilities in the event of a loss of satellite coverage. Neither the Air Force nor Lockheed Martin would comment on the program, or lack thereof."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading ... Please wait.

better hope it's real stealthy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:better hope it's real stealthy (Score:4, Informative)
I think the AC's point was retaliation (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I think the AC's point was retaliation (Score:5, Insightful)
An ICBM, unlike a cruise missile or an SR-71, has a very steep angle of ascent, and comes down pretty steeply, too, doesn't have much of a heat signature on the way down, and since most (or all?) of those held by the US and Russia have MIRV warheads, the things coming down will also be far, far smaller than an aircraft. A spy plane looks nothing like a missile on radar.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:better hope it's real stealthy (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand you have an aircraft traveling at mach 6. This requires you to accurately plot the trajectory, get the laser in place and aimed and firing for however long it needs to be concentrated on the same spot, all in a matter of minutes. Assuming the laser needs to be concentrated on the same spot for 1 second, the aircraft will have traveled nearly a mile. Not an easy task.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Two. I
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Google has been flying this thing for photo recon already. How the hell do you think they get those shots of women with those ever lovely thong handles?
Re:fsdf 53tgvzxcreahb fg agasgdgu nbcxfharefdawsgg (Score:5, Funny)
A few comments... (Score:4, Insightful)
I hate to state the obvious, but the article is pretty sensational... I can summarize:
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
This happened with the M-21 drone delivery version of the A-12, which was the predecessor type to the SR-71 Blackbird. While practicing the drone release, the drone bounced o
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Already got one of these (Score:5, Funny)
http://www.apogeerockets.com/SR72_Darkbird_Kit.as
It doesn't go 4,000mph, though. It just sits there. I think I was ripped off.
RS-71 (Score:5, Interesting)
The SR-71 Blackbird was originally named the RS-71, but it was renamed when Lyndon Johnson accidentally rearranged the letters during his 1964 announcement of the existence of the SR-71 (which he was supposed to call RS-71). Anyway... airplane history for ya'll.
Re:RS-71 (Score:5, Informative)
Re:RS-71 (Score:5, Informative)
Incorrect according to wiki (Score:3, Insightful)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SR-71_Blackbird#Name _ and_designation [wikipedia.org]
USAF Chief of Staff Curtis LeMay preferred the SR (Strategic Reconnaisance) designation and wanted the RS-71 to be named SR-71. Before the Blackbird was
New Name (Score:5, Interesting)
Will never be as *cool* as SR-71 (Score:3, Interesting)
(My previous post had bad links. Sorry.)
http://www.cnw.mk.ua/weapons/airforce/razv/sr71/im age/sr71ff.jpg [cnw.mk.ua]
http://perso.orange.fr/romain.g/sr71-1.jpg [orange.fr]
No joke. (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously.
The SR-71 is easily the baddest mofo of any item in either the Smithsonian's downtown Air & Space or Air & Space II in the big hangar out by the airport [which is where the SR-71 sits, right smack in the middle of the floor, dominating
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
According to the Smithsonian - http://www.nasm.si.edu/aircraft/lockheed_sr71.htm [si.edu]
Concept sounds a lot like "Aurora" (Score:3, Informative)
That's no plane... (Score:3, Funny)
remember kids... (Score:4, Funny)
Ok, so... (Score:3, Informative)
Does it matter? Well, the first to build a working waverider aircraft was a Scottish amateur rocketry group. Story has it that when NASA and Boeing engineers saw footage of the vehicle flying, they were staring at the screen in sheer envy. They'd got no further than theory. We also all know the story of the New Zealander who has jet-propelled go-karts and his own low-cost cruise missile. And the Gauss Rifle linked to above didn't look too complex, either.
Although amateurs are very unlikely to be building supersonic or hypersonic spy planes in the near future, none of this looks so complex that it could not be done by other nations in comparable time. Don't think it won't happen - too many potential benefits. Variants will also inevitably be adopted by commercial space planes, as it's so much cheaper than using vanilla rocketry and should be much more reliable.
To me, the only question I think worth asking at this point is who will be there first? Lockheed-Martin, China or Rutan? (And after Lockheed's disastrous hovering shuttle replacement in the late 1990s, it's not wise to just assume they'll automatically win such a race.)
probably exists now (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't care... (Score:3, Interesting)
Classified (Score:5, Funny)
I'm confused.
Obligatory linguistic correction (Score:3, Informative)
Redundant. Flak is a German-style contraction for Flugabwehrkanone, anti-aircraft cannon.
Guess that makes me a German Nazi...
rj
Re:Obligatory linguistic correction (Score:5, Funny)
You just Godwinned yourself. I've never seen that before.
Those who forget their history... (Score:3)
Sounds like D-21 redux. (Score:3, Interesting)
However, thanks to technology improvements since then, this new drone could probably work, thanks to better materials, fly-by-wire systems, and GPS navigation for more precise control of flight path. It would probably be launched off modified B-52 bombers like the D-21 drone.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Launching from a B-52 using a booste
Stealth heat signature (Score:4, Interesting)
It seems that the U2 and SR-71 overflights may have had a calming effect on US military actions, as they allowed the US to better understand the USSR's level of alert, and prevented overreaction to a false belief that the USSR may have been massing for an attack.
SA-12 aka S-300 (Score:5, Interesting)
That said, tracking a target at mach 6 is no easy task. If the plane deploys some stealth or good ecm it will be no easy target. But invulnerable I seriously doubt. In the same manner that Russia upgraded its S-27 Topol M ICBM to manoeuvre in order to make targeting by the US ABM interceptor missiles, I am pretty sure that both China and Russia would be able to develop a counter to the SR-72 relatively cheaply, probably by improving the S-300 system.
I think the real use of a system such as this would be against countries like Iran, which the US fears is going to threaten Israel.
Re:Particle beam weapon (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Particle beam weapon (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's what the C4/Thermite is for. Debris isn't worth much when all that's left won't even fill a teaspo
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You know, at 4000mph I really don't think C4 or Thermite would be needed. I think friction would do the trick if there were to be any unplanned aerodynamic manipulations.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)