Refuting blackbird folklore

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
Same here. I live in northern California so I have heard all the stuff
coming from Beale AFB and the Mach 3.0-3.5 range seems to be the
truth; however, the airframe of the SR-71 is stressed for Mach 4.0
flight. Maybe like the Foxbat this was for emergency only with
resulting damage to the engines and a/c. But I see little need for
such speed given the Blackbird's height invunerability.


What height invulnerability? It worked in the 60's but in todays
environment, there are quite a few missiles that could reach out and touch
the SR-71.

On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 07:21:36 -0500, "Brian"
wrote:


"robert arndt" wrote in message
. com...
Same here. I live in northern California so I have heard all the stuff
coming from Beale AFB and the Mach 3.0-3.5 range seems to be the
truth; however, the airframe of the SR-71 is stressed for Mach 4.0
flight. Maybe like the Foxbat this was for emergency only with
resulting damage to the engines and a/c. But I see little need for
such speed given the Blackbird's height invunerability.


What height invulnerability? It worked in the 60's but in todays
environment, there are quite a few missiles that could reach out and touch
the SR-71.

Even back in the day there are some they couldn't ignore. If you
counted both sides I'd give the SA-5, Nike Hercules and Bomarc B fair
odds.

Scott Ferrin wrote in message . ..
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 07:21:36 -0500, "Brian"
wrote:


"robert arndt" wrote in message
. com...
Same here. I live in northern California so I have heard all the stuff
coming from Beale AFB and the Mach 3.0-3.5 range seems to be the
truth; however, the airframe of the SR-71 is stressed for Mach 4.0
flight. Maybe like the Foxbat this was for emergency only with
resulting damage to the engines and a/c. But I see little need for
such speed given the Blackbird's height invunerability.


What height invulnerability? It worked in the 60's but in todays
environment, there are quite a few missiles that could reach out and touch
the SR-71.

Even back in the day there are some they couldn't ignore. If you
counted both sides I'd give the SA-5, Nike Hercules and Bomarc B fair
odds.


Not being able to ignore them (i.e., SA-5), yes. But "fair odds"? I
don't think I'd go that far. A tail chase was unlikely to work (it
took a great deal of energy to get the SAM up to that altitude, not
leaving a lot for subsequent catch up or maneuver). A head-on shot
required a targeting system capable of handling the extreme closure
velocity along with again leaving enough energy to maneuver to the
kill. Possible, but not really likely I'd think. Nike Herc I'd place
in the "very lucky shot" category, unless the nuclear warhead version
was used (unlikely to say the least), and BOMARC in the "when pigs
fly" category (again unless the nuke model was used)--it had the
altitude (but only by challenging its capabilities--its ceiling was
about 100K), but lacked the energy (it could only do about M 3.0
itself).

Brooks

In article ,
"Brian" wrote:

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
Same here. I live in northern California so I have heard all the stuff
coming from Beale AFB and the Mach 3.0-3.5 range seems to be the
truth; however, the airframe of the SR-71 is stressed for Mach 4.0
flight. Maybe like the Foxbat this was for emergency only with
resulting damage to the engines and a/c. But I see little need for
such speed given the Blackbird's height invunerability.


What height invulnerability? It worked in the 60's but in todays
environment, there are quite a few missiles that could reach out and touch
the SR-71.

Well, there's "reach," then there's "reach with a decent chance of
hitting it."

The problem is that the few missiles with the height (80,000 feet plus)
didn't have enough targeting capability to hit the Blackbird at that
height, especially in a stern chase. The best they could do would be to
loft one up and try to get in the way.

The newer ones, like the "big" SA-20, might be able to do it, but it
would still be a fairly tough targeting solution - you'd need to loft
one up before the SR-71 was in range, then acquire it while in midair.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
"Brian" wrote:

"robert arndt" wrote in message
om...
Same here. I live in northern California so I have heard all the stuff
coming from Beale AFB and the Mach 3.0-3.5 range seems to be the
truth; however, the airframe of the SR-71 is stressed for Mach 4.0
flight. Maybe like the Foxbat this was for emergency only with
resulting damage to the engines and a/c. But I see little need for
such speed given the Blackbird's height invunerability.


What height invulnerability? It worked in the 60's but in todays
environment, there are quite a few missiles that could reach out and touch
the SR-71.

Well, there's "reach," then there's "reach with a decent chance of
hitting it."

The problem is that the few missiles with the height (80,000 feet plus)
didn't have enough targeting capability to hit the Blackbird at that
height, especially in a stern chase. The best they could do would be to
loft one up and try to get in the way.

The newer ones, like the "big" SA-20, might be able to do it, but it
would still be a fairly tough targeting solution - you'd need to loft
one up before the SR-71 was in range, then acquire it while in midair.

at which point in time, couldn't the 71 see it coming, and maneuver
to make the geometry as bad as for the others?

redc1c4,
curious ground pounder
--
"Enlisted men are stupid, but extremely cunning and sly, and bear
considerable watching."

Army Officer's Guide

In article ,
redc1c4 wrote:

Chad Irby wrote:

The newer ones, like the "big" SA-20, might be able to do it, but it
would still be a fairly tough targeting solution - you'd need to loft
one up before the SR-71 was in range, then acquire it while in midair.

at which point in time, couldn't the 71 see it coming, and maneuver
to make the geometry as bad as for the others?

At those speeds and heights, it's like trying to skeet shoot cannonballs
from behind after you see the flash from the cannon.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

"redc1c4" wrote in message
...
Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
"Brian" wrote:
What height invulnerability? It worked in the 60's but in todays
environment, there are quite a few missiles that could reach out and
touch
the SR-71.

Well, there's "reach," then there's "reach with a decent chance of
hitting it."

The problem is that the few missiles with the height (80,000 feet plus)
didn't have enough targeting capability to hit the Blackbird at that
height, especially in a stern chase. The best they could do would be to
loft one up and try to get in the way.

Maybe back in the 60's, but today's modern missiles shouldn't have that
tough of a time with it. The Navy has been dealing with hi-alt hi-speed
targets for a while (AS4/6, SS-N-12, SS-N-19) and practices with Vandals
(hi-speed hi-alt). If an enemy SR-71(ok, imagine we sold one to some rogue
nation), came cruising near an Aegis or NTU(ER) ship it would stand a good
chance of becoming fish food(nothing is 100%). The SA-12 and SA-20 are
downright nasty missiles as well

The newer ones, like the "big" SA-20, might be able to do it, but it
would still be a fairly tough targeting solution - you'd need to loft
one up before the SR-71 was in range, then acquire it while in midair.

Missiles like the SA-12/20 and SM-2 have incredibly high speeds and
altitudes.....the SR-71 is not in a favorable position being up in the sky
with no clutter around. If it could reach M3.2 on the deck, there would be
more problems with targeting.

at which point in time, couldn't the 71 see it coming, and maneuver
to make the geometry as bad as for the others?

Sure, but then the 71 misses it's intended track and gets no intel.

In article ,
"Brian" wrote:

Missiles like the SA-12/20 and SM-2 have incredibly high speeds and
altitudes.....the SR-71 is not in a favorable position being up in the sky
with no clutter around. If it could reach M3.2 on the deck, there would be
more problems with targeting.

You have to remember that the SAM-20 tops out at about 4600 MPH, about a
third faster than the SR-71, which makes it a *lot* easier to spoof the
missile's radar, and doesn't give it enough of a speed advantage to make
a strong chance of catching a Mach-3+ aircraft from behind.

They *do* have a much better chance to hitting one nowadays, which is
part of the reason you wouldn't see many SR-71-type planes anywhere near
the big SAM sites. Or why there's that persistent rumor about an SR-71
followup out there...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 01:29:36 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
"Brian" wrote:

Missiles like the SA-12/20 and SM-2 have incredibly high speeds and
altitudes.....the SR-71 is not in a favorable position being up in the sky
with no clutter around. If it could reach M3.2 on the deck, there would be
more problems with targeting.

You have to remember that the SAM-20 tops out at about 4600 MPH, about a
third faster than the SR-71, which makes it a *lot* easier to spoof the
missile's radar, and doesn't give it enough of a speed advantage to make
a strong chance of catching a Mach-3+ aircraft from behind.


Why the fixation of hitting the aircraft from behind? The idea with a
SAM is to hit the target from the front BEFORE it's dropped it's bombs
or hit the target. The reason I think the Bomarc would have a fair
chance is because it certainly had the altitude and head to head it
doesn't have to chase it down. They'd have seen it far enough out and
with that 400 plus mile range it's going to be at speed and altitude
well before the Blackbird would be overhead. Hell even the limited
maneuvering the Blackbird could do at Mach 3 wouldn't help it because
the Bomarc had the energy to maneuver too.

In article ,
Scott Ferrin wrote:

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 01:29:36 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

You have to remember that the SAM-20 tops out at about 4600 MPH, about a
third faster than the SR-71, which makes it a *lot* easier to spoof the
missile's radar, and doesn't give it enough of a speed advantage to make
a strong chance of catching a Mach-3+ aircraft from behind.

Why the fixation of hitting the aircraft from behind?

Because about half of all engagements with long-range missiles happen
from the rear aspect, or from the side (which can be worse in some
cases). Very few aircraft drivers are going to run right down the
throat of a radar when they can sit off to one side and make the missile
work harder. Even with a very long range (400 kilometer) SAM, you have
to have about a 50% overlap with the systems on either side to make sure
you have good coverage, or the penetrating aircraft will just look at
signal strengths on their RWR and drive in between, forcing that
long-range tail chase (or avoiding your engagement ranges altogether).
Even at 7200 KPH, you're looking at a delay of a couple of minutes to
get out to a couple of hundred klicks, which can be a problem when the
target is doing 2/3 of that speed, jamming madly.

Most countries have no chance of affording to cover their entire border
with high-speed, high-altitude, long-range missile sites, especially
places like the former Soviet Union. Sure, you could ring your major
cities with them, but even that's too expensive in the long run. Even
putting one next to each major military target gets pretty darned
expensive.

....and if you do, and you turn those radars on at any time, you get
"tagged" for later attention, which is death on the modern battlefield.
Big radars and fast missiles are great in some cases, but they're easy
targets. They move slowly and they're easy to kill.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.