Do we need the SR-71?

On Mon, 10 May 2004 10:50:12 +0100, John Harper wrote:

Strange that nobody in this thread has mentioned the U2, which
*is* still flying, for all the satellites-not-good-enough reasons
that are mentioned. Surely all the good reasons pro-SR71 are
just as valid for the U2 (except raw speed, but the U2 uses
altitude to avoid being shot down).

But anyway as someone else said, a Piper Cub would have done
the job in Iraq. Aerial reconnaisance is probably a terrible way
to find WMDs, and particularly ineffective when there aren't
any in the first place.

John

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...
One of the most important lessons, I think, coming from the war on
terrorism
is that poor intelligence is becoming very costly. Satellites are
predictable and are unable to loiter over an area, while drones can cover
only relatively small areas. From Desert Shield up to now we have been
basically blind in our search for WMDs, terrorist and troop
concentrations,
mobile Scuds, etc.

I think we are shooting ourselves in the foot, here. The SR-71 is
relatively
cheap, there are enough spare parts to last virtually forever, and it
would
be enormously effective in giving us better intelligence. The planes are
in
pretty good shape; in fact, their airframes are stronger than they were
when
first built. I believe these planes should be re-activated.

--
Christopher J. Campbell
World Famous Flight Instructor
Port Orchard, WA


If you go around beating the Bush, don't complain if you rile the animals.




I thought that the CIA still had one or two SR-71's flying and NASA, I
think, still has one (for sure) or two for high atmospheric research
projects. I think you're right, that the general burden was shifted back
to U2s.

Then again, there are always rumors of the Aurora project. High
altitude blimps may (or already are) soon find themselves geosynchronisely
in position. I know that these blimps will be used in
general telecommunications, deployable military field communications, and
rumors exist for low orbit ease dropping and spying.

I guess what I'm saying is, just because the SR-71 isn't commonly flying,
doesn't have to mean that other mechanisms are not already in place. It's
just that we, the common man, may not currently know about it.

Cheers!