SR-71

[Glenn[_2_]]

[Dr.Smith]

"Glenn" > wrote in message
...
>

Great shot! What kind of camera and lens were you using?

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Glenn" > wrote in message
...
>
In this picture, a couple feet back on the chine on both sides, there is a
blunted, pushed in area on the chines. Almost looks like the nose ran into
a round hole in a wall, and dented the chines. Of course, I doubt that
happened.

What is the story with that? I had never noticed that on other models of
the 71. Is that damage, or a feature, and if it is a feature, what is it
designed to do - if you or someone knows?
--
Jim in NC

[Canuck[_9_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Glenn" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
> In this picture, a couple feet back on the chine on both sides, there is a
> blunted, pushed in area on the chines. Almost looks like the nose ran
> into a round hole in a wall, and dented the chines. Of course, I doubt
> that happened.
>
> What is the story with that? I had never noticed that on other models of
> the 71. Is that damage, or a feature, and if it is a feature, what is it
> designed to do - if you or someone knows?
> --
> Jim in NC

The original aircraft from which the SR-71 sprang was the Lockheed A-11. It
then morphed into the YF-12. Finally, it became the SR-71. The A-11 and the
YF-12A sported a different nose/chine configuration than what you finally
got to see on the SR_71.

Nick

[Maple1]

Not that one it is an sr71 I believe that is a later modification


Canuck wrote:
>
> "Morgans" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>
>> "Glenn" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>
>> In this picture, a couple feet back on the chine on both sides, there
>> is a blunted, pushed in area on the chines. Almost looks like the
>> nose ran into a round hole in a wall, and dented the chines. Of
>> course, I doubt that happened.
>>
>> What is the story with that? I had never noticed that on other models
>> of the 71. Is that damage, or a feature, and if it is a feature, what
>> is it designed to do - if you or someone knows?
>> --
>> Jim in NC
>
>
> The original aircraft from which the SR-71 sprang was the Lockheed A-11.
> It then morphed into the YF-12. Finally, it became the SR-71. The A-11
> and the YF-12A sported a different nose/chine configuration than what
> you finally got to see on the SR_71.
>
> Nick
>
>
>

[Canuck[_9_]]

"Maple1" > wrote in message
...

> Not that one it is an sr71 I believe that is a later modification

>>> What is the story with that? I had never noticed that on other models
>>> of the 71. Is that damage, or a feature, and if it is a feature, what
>>> is it designed to do - if you or someone knows?
>>> --
>>> Jim in NC
>>
>>
>> The original aircraft from which the SR-71 sprang was the Lockheed A-11.
>> It then morphed into the YF-12. Finally, it became the SR-71. The A-11
>> and the YF-12A sported a different nose/chine configuration than what you
>> finally got to see on the SR_71.
>>
>> Nick


Hmmmm....curious/strange. I went and had a look and you are right. My foggy
memory failed me. The A-11/YF-12A nosecones were different but not like what
is present in that image. It almost seems like an intermediate morph between
the A-11/YF-12A and the SR-71.

The other possibility is that someone bent it. :)

Nick

[John Szalay]

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Glenn" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
> In this picture, a couple feet back on the chine on both sides, there
> is a blunted, pushed in area on the chines. Almost looks like the
> nose ran into a round hole in a wall, and dented the chines. Of
> course, I doubt that happened.
>
> What is the story with that? I had never noticed that on other models
> of the 71. Is that damage, or a feature, and if it is a feature, what
> is it designed to do - if you or someone knows?


Those "dents" are the modification for the ECM antennas.
(Electronic counter measures)

[John Szalay]

"Canuck" > wrote in

> Hmmmm....curious/strange. I went and had a look and you are right. My
> foggy memory failed me. The A-11/YF-12A nosecones were different but
> not like what is present in that image. It almost seems like an
> intermediate morph between the A-11/YF-12A and the SR-71.
>
> The other possibility is that someone bent it. :)
>
> Nick
>
>
> Attachment decoded: YF-12A.jpg
> ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01CADF55.58129EF0--


This photo is the YF-12A and the chine mod is for the ASG-18 fire
control radar. to insure directional stability for the chine being cut
three small fins were added to the rear of the underside of the YF-12A

[Peter Twydell[_2_]]

In message >, John Szalay
> writes
>"Morgans" > wrote in
:
>
>>
>> "Glenn" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>> In this picture, a couple feet back on the chine on both sides, there
>> is a blunted, pushed in area on the chines. Almost looks like the
>> nose ran into a round hole in a wall, and dented the chines. Of
>> course, I doubt that happened.
>>
>> What is the story with that? I had never noticed that on other models
>> of the 71. Is that damage, or a feature, and if it is a feature, what
>> is it designed to do - if you or someone knows?
>
>
>Those "dents" are the modification for the ECM antennas.
> (Electronic counter measures)

I thought they were where the ground crew were supposed to push if the
brakes failed...
--
Peter

Ying tong iddle-i po!

[Dr.Smith]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Glenn" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
> In this picture, a couple feet back on the chine on both sides, there is a
> blunted, pushed in area on the chines. Almost looks like the nose ran
> into
> a round hole in a wall, and dented the chines. Of course, I doubt that
> happened.
>
> What is the story with that? I had never noticed that on other models of
> the 71. Is that damage, or a feature, and if it is a feature, what is it
> designed to do - if you or someone knows?
> --
> Jim in NC
>
>

I just dug this one out of an old file. The SR-71 at Barksdale AFB in
Louisiana has the same indentions.

[John Szalay]

Peter Twydell > wrote in news:NuUUztCC0FzLFwd3
>>Those "dents" are the modification for the ECM antennas.
>> (Electronic counter measures)
>
> I thought they were where the ground crew were supposed to push if the
> brakes failed...


Only if they are wearing asbestos gloves, it takes a while for the airframe
of the Blackbird to cool after flight..

[John Szalay]

"Dr.Smith" > wrote in
:

>>
>
> I just dug this one out of an old file. The SR-71 at Barksdale AFB in
> Louisiana has the same indentions.
>
>
> begin 666 DSC_0002.JPG
>
> Attachment decoded: DSC_0002.JPG
> `
> end
>
>

That "should" be SR-71A #17967
(last flight 10 Oct 1997, also the Final USAF SR-71 flight,)

[John Szalay]

"Glenn" > wrote in news:4bcac7f1$0$27798$c3e8da3
@news.astraweb.com:

>
> Attachment decoded: SR71 copy.jpg
> ------=_NextPart_000_0030_01CADF28.12193C10--


SR-71A #17964 strategic Air and Space Museum Ashland, Nebraska

20 Mar 1990 Last Flight of SR-71A #964, Beale AFB to Offutt AFB, NE

[Canuck[_9_]]

"John Szalay" > wrote in message
42...
> "Canuck" > wrote in
>
>> Hmmmm....curious/strange. I went and had a look and you are right. My
>> foggy memory failed me. The A-11/YF-12A nosecones were different but
>> not like what is present in that image. It almost seems like an
>> intermediate morph between the A-11/YF-12A and the SR-71.
>>
>> The other possibility is that someone bent it. :)
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>
>> Attachment decoded: YF-12A.jpg
>> ------=_NextPart_000_0009_01CADF55.58129EF0--
>
>
> This photo is the YF-12A and the chine mod is for the ASG-18 fire
> control radar. to insure directional stability for the chine being cut
> three small fins were added to the rear of the underside of the YF-12A

So, I did get it right. I guess they tried a number of different chines/nose
cone profiles before they settled on what is the more familiar one from the
SR-71.

Neat.

Nick

[John Szalay]

"Canuck" > wrote in
:

>
> "John Szalay" > wrote in message
> 42...
>>
>> This photo is the YF-12A and the chine mod is for the ASG-18 fire
>> control radar. to insure directional stability for the chine being
>> cut three small fins were added to the rear of the underside of the
>> YF-12A
>
> So, I did get it right. I guess they tried a number of different
> chines/nose cone profiles before they settled on what is the more
> familiar one from the SR-71.
>
> Neat.
>
> Nick
>

Yep but there were only 3 YF-12A built and two crashed, the one
left is at Dayton. there were others in the production, but the
airframes were changed to the SR-71, can't recall how many off hand.

there were several nose mods tried, and the "dented" one was the last
& it was for the ECM antenna.
(from what I remember , NASA had a canard on atleast one test..)
have to go to the books to get the model/test...)
there were also several noses depending on the mission.
much like the Dragon lady has....
again got to go to the books, and can,t right now. got to
finish mowing the front yard.. .

[Morgans[_2_]]

"John Szalay" > wrote

> there were several nose mods tried, and the "dented" one was the last
> & it was for the ECM antenna.

I'm sure ECM should be instantly clear to me, but I'm not sure in this
case...
Electronic Counter Measures? I didn't know 71's needed them! <g>

> (from what I remember , NASA had a canard on atleast one test..)
> have to go to the books to get the model/test...)
> there were also several noses depending on the mission.
> much like the Dragon lady has....
> again got to go to the books, and can,t right now. got to
> finish mowing the front yard.. .

Thanks for your interest. It is good to know
(but not surprising that someone in this great group)
that someone has the resources to get a line on this difference.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Dr.Smith" > wrote
>
> I just dug this one out of an old file. The SR-71 at Barksdale AFB in
> Louisiana has the same indentions.

Interesting. I had never seen even one with that modification. Now
suddenly there are two!
--
Jim in NC

[John Szalay]

"Morgans" > wrote in news:KPozn.119653$mn6.68680
@newsfe07.iad:

>
> "John Szalay" > wrote
>
>> there were several nose mods tried, and the "dented" one was the last
>> & it was for the ECM antenna.
>
> I'm sure ECM should be instantly clear to me, but I'm not sure in this
> case...
> Electronic Counter Measures? I didn't know 71's needed them! <g>
>
>>


ITs not a case of needing them,
its a case of "you need to know whom is looking at you." In CASE you may
need them..

Remember the U-2 did,nt need them, at first, because nothing could reach
them, but things & times change...

[Morgans[_2_]]

"John Szalay" > wrote

> ITs not a case of needing them,
> its a case of "you need to know whom is looking at you." In CASE you may
> need them..
>
> Remember the U-2 did,nt need them, at first, because nothing could reach
> them, but things & times change...

Indeed.

I noted from another reply to this thread, that one of the last flying
models also had this feature.
With your comment in mind, about "at first they didn't need them, but times
change and" (you might),
I might then be able to imply that the later models were the ones that need
this feature.

Is that on the right track?
--
Jim in NC

[Salamanda]

The Sr71 on display at The Duxford Museum also has these indentations, so
that's three now. or Common as muck as we would say on our side of the pond.
"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Dr.Smith" > wrote
>>
>> I just dug this one out of an old file. The SR-71 at Barksdale AFB in
>> Louisiana has the same indentions.
>
> Interesting. I had never seen even one with that modification. Now
> suddenly there are two!
> --
> Jim in NC
>

[John Szalay]

"Morgans" > wrote in
n
> I might then be able to imply that the later models were the ones that
> need this feature.
>
> Is that on the right track?


Photos of the Blackbird as early as 1979 & 1980 show the ECM dents

[Morgans[_2_]]

"John Szalay" > wrote in message
42...
> "Morgans" > wrote in
> n
>> I might then be able to imply that the later models were the ones that
>> need this feature.
>>
>> Is that on the right track?
>
>
> Photos of the Blackbird as early as 1979 & 1980 show the ECM dents

I guess for a plane as old as the SR-71, that qualifies as relatively
recent.
--
Jim in NC

[Bob (not my real pseudonym)]

On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:41:09 -0500, John Szalay
> wrote:

>"Morgans" > wrote in
>n
>> I might then be able to imply that the later models were the ones that
>> need this feature.
>>
>> Is that on the right track?
>
>
>Photos of the Blackbird as early as 1979 & 1980 show the ECM dents

Interesting thread. The Blackbird that displayed at Abbotsford in
1986 appears not to have had them.

Bob ^,,^

[Canuck[_9_]]

"Bob (not my real pseudonym)" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:41:09 -0500, John Szalay
> > wrote:
>
>>"Morgans" > wrote in
>>n
>>> I might then be able to imply that the later models were the ones that
>>> need this feature.
>>>
>>> Is that on the right track?
>>
>>
>>Photos of the Blackbird as early as 1979 & 1980 show the ECM dents
>
> Interesting thread. The Blackbird that displayed at Abbotsford in
> 1986 appears not to have had them.
>
> Bob ^,,^
>
>

Hey! I resemble that remark! I was at Abbotsford in 1986 and got this shot
of the SR-71 on the ground. I also don't remember seeing any indentations on
the nose. The chines were smooth and uniform all the way around the
aircraft.

Here are two of my shots....

ENJOY!

Nick

[Bob (not my real pseudonym)]

On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 08:54:33 -0500, "Canuck"
> wrote:

>
>"Bob (not my real pseudonym)" > wrote in message
...
>> On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 09:41:09 -0500, John Szalay
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>"Morgans" > wrote in
>>>n
>>>> I might then be able to imply that the later models were the ones that
>>>> need this feature.
>>>>
>>>> Is that on the right track?
>>>
>>>
>>>Photos of the Blackbird as early as 1979 & 1980 show the ECM dents
>>
>> Interesting thread. The Blackbird that displayed at Abbotsford in
>> 1986 appears not to have had them.
>>
>> Bob ^,,^
>>
>>
>
>Hey! I resemble that remark! I was at Abbotsford in 1986 and got this shot
>of the SR-71 on the ground. I also don't remember seeing any indentations on
>the nose. The chines were smooth and uniform all the way around the
>aircraft.
>
>Here are two of my shots....
>
>ENJOY!
>
>Nick

Small world. Well, at least it seems smaller than when I was a kid...
All them volcanoes are letting the air out!

Bob ^,,^

[John Szalay]

"Canuck" > wrote in
:
>>>
>>>Photos of the Blackbird as early as 1979 & 1980 show the ECM dents
>>
>> Interesting thread. The Blackbird that displayed at Abbotsford in
>> 1986 appears not to have had them.
>>
>> Bob ^,,^
>>
>>
>
> Hey! I resemble that remark! I was at Abbotsford in 1986 and got this
> shot of the SR-71 on the ground. I also don't remember seeing any
> indentations on the nose. The chines were smooth and uniform all the
> way around the aircraft.
>
> Here are two of my shots....
>
thanks for the photos.

IMHO:
Looked at the video of the 86 show and the color of the nose paint is
different from the rest of the aircraft. ( not as faded) since the nose of
the Blackbird is interchanegable, and the show was just up the coast from
Beale, I suspect they put a plain nose on for the show, no need for the ECM
nose for what would be considered a training or domestic flight..
just my opinion , of course...

[Canuck[_9_]]

"John Szalay" > wrote in message
42...

>> Hey! I resemble that remark! I was at Abbotsford in 1986 and got this
>> shot of the SR-71 on the ground. I also don't remember seeing any
>> indentations on the nose. The chines were smooth and uniform all the
>> way around the aircraft.
>>
>> Here are two of my shots....
>>
> thanks for the photos.
>
> IMHO:
> Looked at the video of the 86 show and the color of the nose paint is
> different from the rest of the aircraft. ( not as faded) since the nose of
> the Blackbird is interchanegable, and the show was just up the coast from
> Beale, I suspect they put a plain nose on for the show, no need for the
> ECM
> nose for what would be considered a training or domestic flight..
> just my opinion , of course...

Glad you liked the shots. Thanks for explaining this. I know a bit about the
aircraft but have not read up on it as extensively as you have. I guess
having an interchangeable nose depending on the mission was a great asset to
have. It makes me wonder what there is flying around now since the SR-71 has
been retired. Satellites are not as flexible in giving you the information
you need at exactly the moment you need it. Some manner of surveillance
aircraft beyond the capabilities of the SR-71 must exist. I just wonder how
long it will be before we ever learn of it. I've heard and read the rumors
about the Aurora but so far no one has managed to bag the beast.

Nick

[Canuck[_9_]]

"Bob (not my real pseudonym)" > wrote in message
...

>>Hey! I resemble that remark! I was at Abbotsford in 1986 and got this shot
>>of the SR-71 on the ground. I also don't remember seeing any indentations
>>on
>>the nose. The chines were smooth and uniform all the way around the
>>aircraft.
>>
>>Here are two of my shots....
>>
>>ENJOY!
>>
>>Nick
>
> Small world. Well, at least it seems smaller than when I was a kid...
> All them volcanoes are letting the air out!
>
> Bob ^,,^

LOL! I guess the earth is full of beans....

Yes, it is a smaller world. Isn't it neat the way the Internet can bring
people together that have common interests but might never have met
otherwise?

I think you mentioned that you were out in the Seattle/Vancouver area. I
have friends out in Vancouver and I was thinking of visiting them later this
summer and heading out to Abbotsford at the same time. In fact, I was
thinking of making it an aviation pig out and going to Seattle for Seafair
and seeing Boeing and the Museum of Flight first. Any interest in playing
tour guide?

Take care,

Nick

[Al[_3_]]

When I was stationed at Greenham Common AB we had an IAT one year.
They brought an SR-71 in, the peace-campers that were camped outside
the gate got onto the field somehow and spray paintedo ne of the
panels of the aircraft. It cost many thousands of dollars to replace
the panel.
When the plane departed, it took off, did a nice slow circle around
the field, came in super low, then hit full power as it was directly
over their encampment kissed the sky. Meanwhile, the entire camp was
blown against the fenceline f the base, anything plastic, tents, etc,
was melted. It was a beautiful thing.
This was during the 1982-1985 time frame.
I wish I could find my pictures.
Just thought you'd all be interested in a little war story and a
laugh.

Al