Stat me /tg/

22 Luck for quads get

>>54705555
>>54705579

I got quads!!!!!

Bemp for quads

File: gotta go fast.jpg (2MB, 1684x1900px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1684x1900px

fast

File: SR 71 v XB 70.jpg (37KB, 426x413px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 426x413px

>>54706648
That is one of my very favourite stories, and I don't think I will ever tire of hearing it

Also, the sled is pretty hueg, but the Valkyrie was even hueger - and still Mach 3+, though not quite as fast as the blackbird

>>54707594
I had no idea the Valk was so damn big. We've got an A-12 on display at a museum here, which lets me guess how fuckhuge the Valk must really be.

>>54706648

Holy shit that story is epic.

Why dont we make aircraft like that anymore?

File: YF-12A.jpg (22KB, 300x359px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 300x359px

>>54707660
Well it was a bomber

Also, so damn jealous you've got one, they're beautiful machines.

Also love that despite it never getting out of the prototype stage, the YF 12 still managed to be the biggest and fastest fighter there ever was (or, honestly, there's ever likely to be)

File: YF-12 AIM-47.jpg (262KB, 1800x1345px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 1800x1345px

>>54707791
Two reasons:
Missiles caught up - when these things started one of the big draws was that you could outrun anything that was fired at it.
That's no longer the case

Two, their job was done better by satellites - we've got cameras good enough that we don't have to send men rocketing across someone else's country at 3 times the speed of sound any more.


A third point, though very minor compared to the others, is that these planes are colossally, stratospherically expensive. That's a minor consideration, but with points 1 and 2 it's a fair one

>>54707799
It only had 3 AA missiles, but they were nuclear-tipped, because it's the cold war, of course they were

File: Triggerd.png (829KB, 1291x744px) Image search: [Google]

829KB, 1291x744px

>>54707840
>Missiles caught up

Citation needed. Modern missiles may be fast, but not fast enough to catch an aircraft at 60K ft flying at Mach 3.

File: Valkyrie.jpg (191KB, 1360x1110px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 1360x1110px

>>54707660
>>54707594
The thing that always gets me with the Valkryie (other than the 6 engines) is look at all the shit around it - the busses and whatnot.

That's what everyone else was using, and then you've got these fucking space age planes

>>54707934
I know it's wikipedia, but it's just the first one I can find - max target speed is mach 4 for 3 of these Buks, and they can all hit 70k feet

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buk_missile_system#9M317M_and_9M317A_missile_development_projects

File: Valkyrie 7.jpg (832KB, 3000x2250px) Image search: [Google]

832KB, 3000x2250px

>>54707993
more gratuitous ass shots

>>54707993
By the time the radar picks up, locks on, and fires a missile the Blackbird is already outta range.

File: 1411389209264.jpg (54KB, 300x297px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 300x297px

>>54705555
Uncomfortable High Speed Boner/10

>>54708020
True, but it's not something you want to make a bet on - after all, from the tale >>54706648 we know the blackbird wasn't especially stealthy - they tried to be stealthier in some of the prototypes, the A6 and stuff, but they found they had to compromise and choose either stealthier or faster, and they picked faster because Fast was the project's answer to anything.

>We need to do recon
Fast
>What about soviet AA?
Fast
>What about being stealthy though
FAST

>>54708102
Fun fact: If you want something to be fast and/or stealthy you don't actually have to make any tradeoffs since the way you shape the plane is similar.

>>54708153
Fun fact: The blackbird had a radar signature a third the size of the radar signature its exhaust had.

>>54708186
Fun fact: because the ore is so rare, most of the titanium used to build the blackbirds came from the soviet union, bought through CIA cutouts in third world countries.

File: aircraft-military-bomber-nasa-us-air-force-xb-70-valkyrie-f-4-phantom-ii-f-5-freedom-fighter-f-104-starfighter-t-38-talon-hd-wallpapers.jpg (201KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 1920x1080px

>>54707993
Bah, to hell with practicality. We need more planes like these as a matter of principle and pride. Who cares whether they are bombing middle eastern shit holes, surveying atmospheric phenomena, drawing crowds at airshows, or breaking world speed records. The point is we need them because reasons.

>>54708186
That's probably the biggest issue in making the plane stealthy. You can reduce the radar signature of the plane, but if you gotta go fast you're have to accept that there's going to be a huge plume of superheated gas shooting out from the engines and you can't really hide that from the radar.

File: IMG_20161026_113459.jpg (3MB, 4160x3120px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 4160x3120px

>>54708235
There's some value in that sort of crazy engineering in that it inspires people to want to become scientists and engineers, and they act as big adverts for the companies involved.

I know for a fact that things like the Bloodhound land speed project exists specifically for that reason - there's not much actual point to the thing, but the inspiration value alone is what's paying for it, because people need things to capture their imagination.
There's even graphs that show pretty much 1:1 correlation with Space program milestones and STEM graduate numbers about 10 years down the line

File: 1446280814599.jpg (2MB, 2040x1343px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2040x1343px

>>54707799
>>54707660
It's hard to grasp how big strategic bombers are until you've seen them up-close - remember seeing a Vulcan in a museum in the UK and realising you could basically install plumbing and a person could easily live inside the intakes of the fucking thing, you could store harriers inside those things.

>>54708425
>install plumbing
It already has a toilet, it's half way there already

>>54708235
>>54708001
>>54707993
I always felt like the Valkyrie is cold war design at it's finest. Without being an engineer or understanding much more than your run off the mill enthusiast about planes, it's angles, curvatures and material looks just speak to me of the struggle to create something against the will of nature.

Had the pleasure to see the one on exhibit on Ohio as an 18th birthday present from my dad (I'm German, so that was a crazy expense for him) and it is still one of the most memorable moments of my life. Practicality and reliability concerns aside, that thing was and is a marvel.

>>54707791
>Why dont we make aircraft like that anymore?
This anon >>54707840 is mostly right about the drawbacks of the Blackbird, but while we do most recon with satellites, satellites can be evaded. Their orbits are predictable, so if something needs to be hidden, enemies can just cover it when the satellite comes by and move it around after it passes. With a plane, which could be anywhere at any time, that's not possible. That's why supposedly there's an modern, unmanned replacement for the Blackbird that's still classified and hidden from the public.

File: 5d4eb-tupolev-tu-160.jpg (88KB, 625x412px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 625x412px

Now stat the BBEG, /tg/

>>54708593
+10 High five ability with copilot
-10 comfy
-5 How do you even fly this thing
+5 Russia motherfucker, that's how

>>54708593
>>54708645
Why are you talking to yourself?

File: BLNT.png (6KB, 297x80px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 297x80px

>>54708658
Better luck next time, /b/

File: 794px-B-1B_B-2_and_B-52.jpg (100KB, 794x599px) Image search: [Google]

100KB, 794x599px

>>54708593
Like everything involving Russia, size: fuckheug, seeing as it's the largest and heaviest bomber.

It's got a greater load capacity than any of pic related, and kind of hilariously has a bigger wingspan than the goddamn B2 when not swept back. As anon said, strategic bombers are deceptively enormous, and the Blackjack is the hugest of the lot. Only the Valk is slightly longer

Also it can hit mach 2, a goal the B1 gave up on so it could be stealthy instead

>>54708558
>That's why supposedly there's an modern, unmanned replacement for the Blackbird that's still classified and hidden from the public.
Anon, 'AURORA' is the supposed replacement for the SR-71, and it is supposedly to be manned. That is what the black project conspiracy-fags have been saying for years, and they have an ironically high success rate on their predictions when consensus is considered.
Basically, we 'don't' have a replacement for the SR-71 because we actually do and we just don't want people knowing it.

sanic/10

Gotta

G o

F
A
S
T

>>54705555
Man, who takes these pictures?
Cool shit

>>54711263
I think tankers get a lot good shots

>>54707594
I saw the XB-70 Valkyrie and the YF-12 up close and personal at the Air Force Museum in Dayton, OH. It was astonishing just how BIG the Valkyrie is. The YF-12 and SR-71 were a lot bigger than I thought too. Fantastic machines.

File: Dark_Star_USAF.jpg (277KB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

277KB, 1800x1200px

>>54708418
an astute point anon

>>54708558
>>54709137
I'm not sure about Aurora. Even if it once existed as an active project, it might have been mothballed. I haven't heard anything in the last decade and a half about any sightings or its allegedly distinct sonic boom or contrails. Also the US has had other very expensive projects since 2001, the likes of which a hypersonic spy plane wouldn't really contribute much to.

But if you're talking unmanned replacements for the Blackbird, there's Global Hawk, which is a high altitude reconnaissance drone (though its official service ceiling specs are still very modest compared to the U-2 and SR-71). There also used to be DarkStar, which was a stealthy drone, but which was ostensibly cancelled in 1996, and would not have been fast at all.

>>54707594
>>54706648
also, saved hard

File: b-2a_555-B-2_Spirit_and_Northrop_N-9M.jpg (17KB, 555x230px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 555x230px

>>54709137
Pretty sure Aurora was a budgeting codeword for B-2 development.

File: Sprint_missile_launched_from_Kwajalein.jpg (32KB, 781x988px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 781x988px

>>54707791
>Why dont we make aircraft like that anymore?

We dont make anything like we did during the cold war. Have you ever heard of the Sprint missile? It was a two stage solid fuel 100 ton anti-icbm missile that pulls 100g going from 0 to Mach 10. Range of 25 miles and ceiling of 19. It goes so fast its skin reaches 1000f

The Russians have one thats even faster

>>54714023
Seeing as you mentioned skin heating you've reminded me of something - on the ground the Blackbird leaks. It leaks like a sieve because it's got huge (for an aircraft) panel gaps. These are necessary because the tanks expand during the heat of flight, and they couldn't get a sealant that could take the heat.

File: OEMs-Blackbird-Sr71.jpg (137KB, 1000x563px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1000x563px

>>54705555

mai waifu/10

stating the SR-71 / A-12 / YF-12 is always a bitch because the thing we focus on in every game is the stuff the Habu just doesn't do.

it is designed to make Sonic the Hedgehog CRY

it doesn't have HP, or loads of attack power...it's just way fucking fast.
it's still my PlaneFu...look at those curves.
and, this.
>>54706648
no other motherfucker can do that, all that. your movement grid can be measured in STATES.

>>54714023
According to wiki, when accelerating through low atmosphere it doesn't reach 1000f

It reaches about 6000f, and sheathes itself in plasma

File: sr-71-8.jpg (50KB, 650x506px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 650x506px

>>54714476
She is beautiful

>>54714490
Eh, i was only off by a factor of six

Its also nuclear

File: Vulcan 1.jpg (51KB, 764x380px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 764x380px

>>54715847
>Its also nuclear
The cold war summed up in 3 words

>>54708418
Great point!

Im sure if still had cutting edge tech wacky tech we wouldn't have a shortage of engineers.

>>54705555
Has anybody used one of these or these >>54707799
or these >>54707993
in a game of Planes and Mercs or something similar?

>>54714453
It leaks so bad that they had to immediately do an in-flight refuel after taking off.

>>54706648
Do you have the slowest speed one?

File: DGAGyPiXUAAPWTm.jpg (69KB, 845x480px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 845x480px

>>54721347
I can't find an image, but the story is published in Plane & Pilot Magazine under the title Speed Is Life. Will they get mad if someone just copy-pastes it here onto this anonymous Taiwanese pottery forum?

>>54724612
I doubt they'd care

File: 122916_1323_BookReviewT1.png (290KB, 624x483px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 624x483px

>>54721347
Brian Shul, Speed Is Life (Plane & Pilot 2009)

As a former SR-71 pilot, and a professional keynote speaker, the question I’m most often asked is “How fast would that SR-71 fly?” I can be assured of hearing that question several times at any event I attend. It’s an interesting question, given the aircraft’s proclivity for speed, but there really isn’t one number to give, as the jet would always give you a little more speed if you wanted it to. It was common to see 35 miles a minute. Because we flew a programmed Mach number on most missions, and never wanted to harm the plane in any way, we never let it run out to any limits of temperature or speed. Thus, each SR-71 pilot had his own individual “high” speed that he saw at some point on some mission. I saw mine over Libya when Khadafy fired two missiles my way, and max power was in order. Let’s just say that the plane truly loved speed and effortlessly took us to Mach numbers we hadn’t previously seen.

So it was with great surprise, when at the end of one of my presentations, someone asked, “What was the slowest you ever flew in the Blackbird?” This was a first. After giving it some thought, I was reminded of a story that I had never shared before, and relayed the following.

I was flying the SR-71 out of RAF Mildenhall, England, with my back-seater, Walt Watson; we were returning from a mission over Europe and the Iron Curtain when we received a radio transmission from home base. As we scooted across Denmark in three minutes, we learned that a small RAF base in the English countryside had requested an SR-71 flypast. The air cadet commander there was a former Blackbird pilot, and thought it would be a motivating moment for the young lads to see the mighty SR-71 perform a low approach. No problem, we were happy to do it. After a quick aerial refueling over the North Sea, we proceeded to find the small airfield.

File: 321-nasm-9a08308q.jpg (298KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1000x1000px

>>54724953
Walter had a myriad of sophisticated navigation equipment in the back seat, and began to vector me toward the field. Descending to subsonic speeds, we found ourselves over a densely wooded area in a slight haze. Like most former WWII British airfields, the one we were looking for had a small tower and little surrounding infrastructure. Walter told me we were close and that I should be able to see the field, but I saw nothing. Nothing but trees as far as I could see in the haze. We got a little lower, and I pulled the throttles back from the 325 knots we were at. With the gear up, anything under 275 was just uncomfortable. Walt said we were practically over the field—yet, there was nothing in my windscreen. I banked the jet and started a gentle circling maneuver in hopes of picking up anything that looked like a field.

File: page-11.jpg (104KB, 920x518px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 920x518px

>>54724965
Meanwhile, below, the cadet commander had taken the cadets up on the catwalk of the tower in order to get a prime view of the flypast. It was a quiet, still day with no wind and partial gray overcast. Walter continued to give me indications that the field should be below us, but in the overcast and haze, I couldn’t see it. The longer we continued to peer out the window and circle, the slower we got. With our power back, the awaiting cadets heard nothing. I must have had good instructors in my flying career, as something told me I better cross-check the gauges. As I noticed the airspeed indicator slide below 160 knots, my heart stopped and my adrenalin-filled left hand pushed two throttles full forward. At this point, we weren’t really flying, but were falling in a slight bank. Just at the moment that both afterburners lit with a thunderous roar of flame (and what a joyous feeling that was), the aircraft fell into full view of the shocked observers on the tower. Shattering the still quiet of that morning, they now had 107 feet of fire-breathing titanium in their face as the plane leveled and accelerated, in full burner, on the tower side of the infield, closer than expected, maintaining what could only be described as some sort of ultimate knife-edge pass.

File: 972record1a.jpg (53KB, 559x434px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 559x434px

>>54724987
Quickly reaching the field boundary, we proceeded back to Mildenhall without incident. We didn’t say a word for those next 14 minutes. After landing, our commander greeted us, and we were both certain he was reaching for our wings. Instead, he heartily shook our hands and said the commander had told him it was the greatest SR-71 flypast he had ever seen, especially how we had surprised them with such a precise maneuver that could only be described as breathtaking. He said that some of the cadet’s hats were blown off and the sight of the planform of the plane in full afterburner dropping right in front of them was unbelievable. Walt and I both understood the concept of “breathtaking” very well that morning, and sheepishly replied that they were just excited to see our low approach.

As we retired to the equipment room to change from space suits to flight suits, we just sat there—we hadn’t spoken a word since “the pass.” Finally, Walter looked at me and said, “One hundred fifty-six knots. What did you see?” Trying to find my voice, I stammered, “One hundred fifty-two.” We sat in silence for a moment. Then Walt said, “Don’t ever do that to me again!” And I never did.

File: sr-71-blackbird.jpg (127KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1024x576px

>>54725002
A year later, Walter and I were having lunch in the Mildenhall Officer’s Club, and overheard an officer talking to some cadets about an SR-71 flypast that he had seen one day. Of course, by now the story included kids falling off the tower and screaming as the heat of the jet singed their eyebrows. Noticing our HABU patches, as we stood there with lunch trays in our hands, he asked us to verify to the cadets that such a thing had occurred. Walt just shook his head and said, “It was probably just a routine low approach; they’re pretty impressive in that plane.” Impressive indeed.

Little did I realize after relaying this experience to my audience that day that it would become one of the most popular and most requested stories. It’s ironic that people are interested in how slow the world’s fastest jet can fly. Regardless of your speed, however, it’s always a good idea to keep that cross-check up...and keep your Mach up, too.

File: SR 71.jpg (31KB, 341x255px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 341x255px

>>54724953
>>54724965
>>54724987
>>54725002
>>54725023
Damn, that's pretty great as well.
Capping

File: Vulcan trio.jpg (2MB, 3113x3600px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3113x3600px

>tfw when your country doesn't have dedicated bombers any more

>>54708020
>RADAR and launcher/missile can never be separate
Okay.

>>54726637
For the RADAR's firing solution to make sense, it has to be near the missile launcher, to the point where the blackbird is out of range as was said. Soviet air defense could alert missile sites on the outbound leg of the flight, but the firing solution would still have to be generated locally.

>>54726045
It saddens me as an American. Britbongs can make some truly remarkable aircraft.

File: Concorde Bomber.jpg (59KB, 800x265px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 800x265px

>>54731890
Sometimes we have funny ideas with what to do with them though...

File: B1 Lancer.jpg (558KB, 2500x2000px) Image search: [Google]

558KB, 2500x2000px

Pic related isn't quite as cool, or as fast, as some of the rest of the planes in this thread, but it's pretty impressive all the same

File: B1 Lancer B.jpg (53KB, 1024x521px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 1024x521px

>>54733458
As mentioned previously ITT, the B1 never quite got to Mach 2 - it tops out at Mach 1.25

Now there was a planned variant, the B1 (Regional) that would replace the engines and limit the range, but let it fly at Mach 2, topping out at 2.2

Odd name for it, "regional", until you know that the B1 is commonly nicknamed the "bone", as in "B-one".

Which would make the B1(R)... the Boner.

Who said engineers were mature?

File: British_Airways_Concorde_G-BOAC_03.jpg (251KB, 1024x687px) Image search: [Google]

251KB, 1024x687px

>>54732620
Well, if you're looking to build a strategic bomber on the cheap, it doesn't seem like a terrible idea. You already have a functional long range, Mach 2 aircraft that can handle a pretty decent payload. Seems the real limitation to implementation was rooted in doctrine as opposed to feasibility.

File: SR-72.png (176KB, 414x233px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 414x233px

>>54707791

Lockheed has plans for the SR-72, which probably falls under Prompt Global Strike. I wouldn't be surprised if it's eventually rolled out. Difference is that it's a drone, not a piloted aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prompt_Global_Strike
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_SR-72

File: B1 Lancer night.jpg (76KB, 1024x550px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 1024x550px

>>54708425
They're big planes

File: B2.webm (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

Smoooooth flying

File: 1381065154819.jpg (2MB, 2000x1240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2000x1240px

>>54738252
thanks to the on board computer that constantly adjusts the control surfaces

File: 2011-08-27_151907_366599.jpg (217KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

217KB, 1280x720px

>>54705555
Here goes. I'm using a template from AirWar C21 Max 2nd ed.
They don't have an entry for any plane in the Blackbird family, go figure.

Min speed: 5
Max speed: ~40 (at 2" per 100 knots)
Engine Power: Medium 0.44 thrust/weight ratio
Accel phase 1/Accel phase 2: +3/+3 implies up to a 300 knot increase in one turn, while a turn seems to be 16 seconds very roughly; not sure if reasonable
Decel: -4 standard
Maneuverability: Medium
Gun: -
Ammo: 0
Bomb computer: +0
Damage points: 6
Chaff: -
Flare: -
ECM: -2 on board radar countermeasures, low RCS, high speed, high altitude
Radar: - has radar, but this stat is for radar spotting and missile locks
Size: +2 same as a Vark
Spot: +0
Maximum Load: -

>>54733969
I think the sr-72 is a red herring to take out attention away from what ever it is they are truly working on.

File: Giorgio-Tsoukalos.png (129KB, 245x337px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 245x337px

>>54742558
well don't leave us hanging anon

>>54733821
The Concorde was such a beautiful thing.

>>54732620
And here I was thinking that the Valkyrie is pretty much what would happen if you took a look at the Concorde and decided to weaponise it.

>>54707934
Don't quote me on this but the ASTER system can do it already reliably IIRC.

File: SR 71 Blackbird cockpit.jpg (3MB, 2880x1522px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2880x1522px

>>54705555
Controls: Complex

>>54707840
>Missiles caught up - when these things started one of the big draws was that you could outrun anything

Do we actually know the actual top speed of these things? If I recall correctly the only reason we even know how fast this thing really got was because
whenever the Russians announced a new top speed record, a few weeks later the Air Force would announce a new record a few MPH higher. Then a
few weeks after that the Russians would do the same thing, and so on and so on.

Basically, it was a choice between keeping your military tech secret and showing off the size of your big black plane.

File: SR 71 dramatic lighting.jpg (472KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 1920x1200px

>>54748105
The big reason we know how fast it went was the retirement party - with the USSR broken up and NuRussia taking a break from dick-swinging with missiles - seeing as they already had ones that would hit Mach 4, which from every interview is well above what the blackbird went at - Brian Shul, the storyteller of the tales ITT says he maxed Mach 3.5 evading a missile over Libya, Mach 3.3 was the designed max - and the program was wound down, but they decided to end it on a fun note and break all the US continental airspeed records

Which they did, in one flight:
LA-DC in 64 minutes 20 seconds,
Coast to Coast in 67 minutes 54 seconds,
Kansas City - DC in 25 minutes 59 seconds
St.Louis - Cincinnati in 8 minutes 32 seconds

The other big reason we know the speed was the London-NYC and London-LA flights in the 70s, but they both included refueling

>>54742558

It's almost definitely not, given that there's also the DARPA Falcon Project and the Boeing X-51, and we've had shit like the NASA X-43.

Hypersonic Reconnaissance and Strike drones are just one the projects coming down the pipeline, absolutely no weird conspiracy for it.