SR-71's sucessor

I for one think that the SR-71 has not only been replaced, but its
replacement has been replaced. in other words, there have probably
been two generations of ultra-fast spy planes beyond the SR-71.

The SR-71 was made in the 60s. probably by the late 70s or early
80s, a sucessor to SR-71 was flying.

and by now, the sucessor to the SR-71's sucessor has, at least been
tested, if not put into service.

"R420" wrote in message
om...
I for one think that the SR-71 has not only been replaced, but its
replacement has been replaced. in other words, there have probably
been two generations of ultra-fast spy planes beyond the SR-71.

I don't. I've yet to be convinced a direct SR71 replacement was fielded.

tim gueguen 101867

"tim gueguen" wrote in message
news:EOlEb.743405$pl3.46839@pd7tw3no...

"R420" wrote in message
om...
I for one think that the SR-71 has not only been replaced, but its
replacement has been replaced. in other words, there have probably
been two generations of ultra-fast spy planes beyond the SR-71.

I don't. I've yet to be convinced a direct SR71 replacement was fielded.

There was probably a replacement that just didn't quite work out and was
dumped.



tim gueguen 101867

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 17:51:32 GMT, "tim gueguen" wrote:


"R420" wrote in message
. com...
I for one think that the SR-71 has not only been replaced, but its
replacement has been replaced. in other words, there have probably
been two generations of ultra-fast spy planes beyond the SR-71.

I don't. I've yet to be convinced a direct SR71 replacement was fielded.

tim gueguen 101867

Well, if you count satellites..... :-))

Al Minyard

Satellites, Drones (air/ground/sea), U-2, "Other" manned platforms . . .

All Very Healthy and Very Funded.

Steve Swartz



"Alan Minyard" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 17:51:32 GMT, "tim gueguen" wrote:


"R420" wrote in message
. com...
I for one think that the SR-71 has not only been replaced, but its
replacement has been replaced. in other words, there have probably
been two generations of ultra-fast spy planes beyond the SR-71.

I don't. I've yet to be convinced a direct SR71 replacement was fielded.

tim gueguen 101867

Well, if you count satellites..... :-))

Al Minyard

"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Satellites, Drones (air/ground/sea), U-2, "Other" manned platforms . . .

All Very Healthy and Very Funded.

All proving to be much better than the very obsolete SR-71.

(R420) wrote in
om:

I for one think that the SR-71 has not only been replaced, but its
replacement has been replaced. in other words, there have probably
been two generations of ultra-fast spy planes beyond the SR-71.

The SR-71 was made in the 60s. probably by the late 70s or early
80s, a sucessor to SR-71 was flying.

and by now, the sucessor to the SR-71's sucessor has, at least
been tested, if not put into service.

The SR-71s sucessor is probably hurdeling along at 150km
as we speak.


Regards...

Since the Americans were still flying the SR-71 on missions into the
early
90's I'd have to day you are wrong.


"R420" wrote in message
om...
I for one think that the SR-71 has not only been replaced, but its
replacement has been replaced. in other words, there have probably
been two generations of ultra-fast spy planes beyond the SR-71.

The SR-71 was made in the 60s. probably by the late 70s or early
80s, a sucessor to SR-71 was flying.

and by now, the sucessor to the SR-71's sucessor has, at least been
tested, if not put into service.

The SR-71 was replaced by several drones. One of the problems
with the SR-71, was the Intel was basically redundant to what was
collected by satellites. It had no tactical intel value due to its speed.

Operating out of the former Soviet republics, we have been flying
drones almost every day, producing real-time data, and electronic
order of battle tables, that used to take weeks with the RC-135.

Speed isn't everything, and it isn't the only thing. Most battle
managers would love to just park a vehicle over a country and
have it update in real-time, rather than the one pass a day, the
old SR-71 provided. There's drones today that have unrefueled
orbit times of 24 hours, and they have kilowatt power sources that
are able to produce significant data collection.

The unsophisticated days of Vietnam, with its morning recce,
followed by an air strike, is over. Even the most basic forces have
much more sophisticated defenses, and it takes hours of
observation to produce an ATO.

In message VasEb.2214$6l1.2011@okepread03 - "Gene Storey"
writes:

The SR-71 was replaced by several drones. One of the problems
with the SR-71, was the Intel was basically redundant to what was
collected by satellites. It had no tactical intel value due to its speed.

Operating out of the former Soviet republics, we have been flying
drones almost every day, producing real-time data, and electronic
order of battle tables, that used to take weeks with the RC-135.

Speed isn't everything, and it isn't the only thing. Most battle
managers would love to just park a vehicle over a country and
have it update in real-time, rather than the one pass a day, the
old SR-71 provided. There's drones today that have unrefueled
orbit times of 24 hours, and they have kilowatt power sources that
are able to produce significant data collection.


The scenario you describe is distinctly different from what SR-71
could handle: to "park UAV" over a hot spot requires KNOWING IN ADVANCE
where it is and slowly bringing all the logistics of the loitering UAV.
The speed of the SR-71 allowed rec. flight when some place on the globe
UNEXPECTEDLY became "hot spot" and you have no close bases to deploy
slow flying UAVs from. Satellites are often useless because their
orbits are predictable and the "bad guys" schedule their activities
accordingly. If memory serves, that was the reason that SR-71 had been
returned to service few years before being retired finally (at least,
so far): sats were not flexible enough (remember, you can't refuel
them and changing orbit takes LOTS of fuel).



************************************************** ****************************
* Arie Kazachin, Israel, e-mail: *
************************************************** ****************************
NOTE: before replying, leave only letters in my domain-name. Sorry, SPAM trap.
___
.__/ |
| O /
_/ /
| | I HAVE NOWHERE ELSE TO GO !!!
| |
| | |
| | /O\
| _ \_______[|(.)|]_______/
| * / \ o ++ O ++ o
| | |
| |
\ \_)
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\ |
\_|