A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

SR- 71/ Blackbird lore



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 24th 03, 03:01 AM
John
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Richard Caldwell wrote:

As long as you guys are swapping lies about the Blackbird, would someone
please recount the story of the SR-71 that suffered a flamout just this side
of Africa on its way back to the east coast. As I understand it, that makes
the SR-71 the record holder for long-distance gliding (as in un-powered
flight). Of course, it could be just another whopper, but I've never gotten
the "real poop" on that particular incident.

Richard Caldwell


IIRC: That was a U-2 and he flamed out near Bermuda..
huge difference in the glide ratio of SR-71 & U-2


  #3  
Old July 27th 03, 02:43 AM
vincent p. norris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

huge difference in the glide ratio of SR-71 & U-2

Yep. Like the difference between a lead-covered high drag rock and a feather.


Well, in view of its speed, I doubt the SR-71 had high drag. I'd like
to hear what Mary Shafer has to say about that.

And "lead-covered...rock" seems to imply you think weight affects
glide ratio. It does not.

A U-2 constructed of lead would have the same glide ratio as one
constructed of balsa wood. It would glide faster, but just as far.

vince norris
  #5  
Old July 28th 03, 09:43 PM
B2431
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

A U-2 constructed of lead would have the same glide ratio as one
constructed of balsa wood. It would glide faster, but just as far.
vince norris


Say what?
Dave


Um, I think there's be a slight difference in wing loading which just might
have a minor affect on glide ratio. Translation: the lead U-2 would glide like
a bowling ball.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired
  #6  
Old July 28th 03, 11:50 PM
Jim
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 28 Jul 2003 20:43:34 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

A U-2 constructed of lead would have the same glide ratio as one
constructed of balsa wood. It would glide faster, but just as far.
vince norris


Say what?
Dave


Um, I think there's be a slight difference in wing loading which just might
have a minor affect on glide ratio. Translation: the lead U-2 would glide like
a bowling ball.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired


What a wonderful question. Glider pilots often add water ballast, 200
- 300 lbs I think, to their gliders to increase airspeed at a GIVEN
glide angle, thus improving the glider's penetration through the air
at that glide angle. The extra weight does not alter the glide angle
(except for very small improvements due to higher Reynolds numbers at
the higher airspeed). The glider's descent rate is increased by the
extra weight, but the airspeed is also equivalently increased so the
glide angle remains (pretty nearly) constant, glide angle being a
factor of only lift and drag, weight not even being in the
calculation.

As for a lead U-2 vs a balsa wood U-2, the lead U-2 would certainly
glide as long as its wing loading was such that its wing could supply
sufficient lift to sustain equilibrium in steady flight. The "catch"
here is probably the inclination to picture the lead U-2 and the balsa
U-2 as the same size. In such a case, if the lead U-2 were the same
size as the gliding balsa U-2 I expect the lead one would do as you
so delightfully describe, and glide "like a bowling ball".
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.