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 » Aviation Images » Aviation Photos
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

SR-71



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 19th 10, 04:41 AM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Maple1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 407
Default SR-71

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



  #2  
Old April 19th 10, 06:14 AM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Canuck[_9_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default SR-71


"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

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	YF-12A.jpg
Views:	52
Size:	22.3 KB
ID:	42172  
  #3  
Old April 19th 10, 02:00 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
John Szalay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 518
Default SR-71

"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
  #4  
Old April 19th 10, 06:14 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Canuck[_9_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 77
Default SR-71


"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



  #5  
Old April 19th 10, 08:13 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
John Szalay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 518
Default SR-71

"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.. .


  #6  
Old April 20th 10, 10:15 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Morgans[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,924
Default SR-71


"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


  #7  
Old April 20th 10, 11:31 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
John Szalay
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 518
Default SR-71

"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...
  #8  
Old May 25th 10, 05:22 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Al[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default SR-71

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
 




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 04:39 AM.


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