Go to bit.ly/HabuNWYT and use code NWYT to get an additional 15% off your pre-order and secure your piece of history with the limited-edition SR-71 Habu.
Gosh the SR71 is my favorite plane ever to be created, I wish I wasn't a broke student I would love that watch, but I can't afford not to eat or pay rent on my savings.
You're obviously European so why do you say Fahrenheit instead of Celsius? It also makes sense to say it in Celsius since you probably have international audience and there are only 2 countries of the 195 countries in the world that uses Fahrenheit
When i think you can't possibly teach me anything new about the SR-71 in TH-cam, you came up with original footage and new tidbits of info. Great work.
@@robsim4692 Most witnesses were window shopoers, even the ones stationed at the same base. You just didn't walk up on them thanks to the SAC trained killers who launched them. So, I'd guess I've been within 300 yds of one, but on the other side of the fence.
I was working on the SR-71 when it was finally cancelled by Clinton in October 1997. During this time, the military had installed a data link on the SR-71. The data link was installed in a camera bay forward of the front landing gear. The data link antenna radome protruded down into the shockwave coming off the nose of the aircraft, so the pilot to watch how he banked the aircraft or the shockwave coming off the radome would go into the engine inlet and cause an unstart. Both of the aircraft that we flew, 967 and 971, are now part of museums, and I have been told that one of them has that radome installed, but I'm not sure which of the two since they aren't located close to each other (one in Oregon and the other in Louisiana), it's kind of hard to verify which one.
Very interesting.. I've heard that when supersonic if the engine conditions weren't perfect, the engine itself could "swallow" the shockwave coming off the inlet air cone and cause a flame out, from my understanding the SR-71's intake nose cone's are hydraulically/mechanically adjusted
Миг 25 отучил эту птичку летать и да он не выглядел как космолёт неземного происхождения . Инженеры были на высоком уровне создавшие самолёт с подобными скоростями , но гораздо более удобный в обслуживании.
It's probably 1930's tech. It just went on records in the 50's. Imagine what they have today! The sentient world simulation project comes to mind. And that's already 15 years old by now.
That's why when ever some one says that they are worried about Russian or Chinese tech, i tell them we literally experimented with EVERYTHING they are doing now 40+ years ago.
I will always, always have a soft spot for the A-12/SR-71. As a kid I was fascinated by the impossibly cool and futuristic shape of the airframe, as a teenager I spent an obscene amount of time geeking over its stats and the stories of the people that flew it, and as an adult, my now husband proposed to me underneath the one that’s displayed outside of the San Diego Air and Space Museum. I think that the Blackbird is one of the greatest engineering achievements of the human race. It pushed the boundaries of what was possible, and it looked ridiculously badass while doing it. Gotta love it.
Did you watch D.A.R.R.Y.L 50 times like I did?I love that thing the first time I saw it I was literally speechless I was trying to tell my Dad how incredibly Awesome It looked but I couldn't talk, That's the one and only time I was rendered speechless! thanks for sharing Your passion for this masterpiece of engineering and Breathtakingly powerful machine so elegant and beautiful at the same time!
Brother, I’m a 15 year veteran of the US Navy. Spent my career as an FMF corpsman with Marines. I just wanted to chime in and tell you how impressed I am with your content. I love to see and hear the passion you have as it’s so palpable in your videos. You clearly do your research. I love seeing you touring American machines. I love that you’re reaching out to PAO’s to ask for this kind of exposure. It reminds me of something my dad told me when I enlisted in 1995. He passed yesterday so my heart is so happy that watching this video immediately put great memories of him to the forefront of my mind. Thank you for that. Truly. I needed the break from the sadness. Anyway, he’d told me… “never be afraid to ask for exactly what you want or need. The worst they could say, is no.” (Which, by the way… is NOT the worse thing they can say!🤣) I’m proud of your growth. I’m proud that we have folks like you who have a true passion and brings real and true information to the people. I’m proud to be a member of your channel. Thanks for all you do! I have mad respect for you, brother. Cheers mate! 🤙🏻
They lost an engine, which compelled them to head to the Phillipines for an emergency landing. Minutes later they got a B Hydro light and rode it out until the system failed. Then they ejected.
A couple of things not mentioned that were critical to the SR. First the liquid Nitrogen wasn’t used for starting or running the engines. If an engine quit in flight it was called an “unstart”. The TEB was used to restart the engine. No TEB, no restart. All this had to happen when the airframe is suffering from severe stresses from having power on one side but none on the other. One thing that most people don’t mentioning is the very high flash point for the JP 7. You could drop a lit match into the puddles on the ground and all they would do is go out. Lastly, one “trick” fastmover used to tell if a missile has them targeted was if the crew could see the missiles exhaust. Off to the left or right, they weren’t the target. If you don’t see the exhaust, you’d best time your evasive maneuver. It took a lot of guts because you had to wait until the missile was too close to maneuver with you. Or, if your in the SR, you just throttle up and out ran it!
Not mentioned? He did explain the purpose of the liquid nitrogen (as an inert atmosphere to prevent fuel-vapour ignition in the head-space in the fuel tanks).
Exactly as mentioned he never talked about using LN to restart but for tank inerting. At the temperatures that aircraft got to at speed this was a very real concern. Not mentioned but a prime reason why they had to purge the LN for refueling is the same reason fighters depressurize their systems to get gas. At full pressure the tanker wouldn't be able to transfer fuel to the recipient aircraft. So having to purge then refill the tanks as needed with nitrogen to inert the tanks would be a prime limiting factor for normal flight operations. Also, TEB was used to light off the afterburners so no TEB no afterburner too. So no excessive jockeying of the throttle in and out of AB for those guys like you can see in fighter jets.
true about the fuel. I was an Army rotary wing refueler and the JP8 we used, you could drop a burning torch into it and it would go out. Getting those vapors to catch was an exercise in patience if you wanted to use it to burn something.
The fact this aircraft was designed in the 50s and 60s and people think we can't design something faster is crazy people also not believing the F-22 and 35 are stealthy is hilarious
The SR-72 "Son of Blackbird" has been in development since 2003 and in the past year or so Skunkworks leadership has said it's already flying. Assuming they aren't just playing coy and the SR-72 IS actually flying, then the US has an aircraft capable of over Mach 6 with the potential to be not only a recon plane, but a fully fledged weapons delivery platform for hypersonic missiles.
It is all part of a misinformation plan for a possible opposition to believe that they have a chance. Otherwise they might resolve to use more drastic measures, like suicidal missions of mutual annihilation......
@@cruisinguy6024. Exactly, that's where the type of mission dictated by a political situation would require such capabilities..... . A scenario in which further escalation needs to be avoided while achieving the political objectives.
@@HalRiveria. When they tell you it is flying, that means that it has been flying for quite sometime already. Probably much more earlier than what they are telling you..... The general public doesn't needs to know, unless they need to know!
Same. I'm not a watch person either but that has to be the coolest time piece I've ever seen. I knew it was gonna be expensive but just shy of $2k USD is a bit much for me.
Erm, Maury Rosenburg talks about the missle incident on the peninsula Seniors video channel on youtube, the radar warning light is a P for painting. Then a L for launch, this launch was 99% of the time simulated and the sro would then electrically 'ping the missle with a known frequency. In this incident the missle answered so the radar guided missle was following a radar beam to an altitude above 85,000ft they were cruising at mach 3.1. To avoid the missle the pilot just increased the throttle. And the rso jams the signal between the missle and the control station. After a short time around 20 seconds the missle exploded around a similar altitude off to the right of the aircraft several miles away.
We jet pilots call them "Thrust levers", not throttle. There is no "throttle body" in a jet engine that I am aware of. Also, in turboprop aircraft, they are called "Power Levers" because you are increasing the engine power to drive the propellers.
@@manho9877a throttle is a throttle regardless of the engine, I get where your coming from but as somebody who is into anything with a motor I just want to say a throttle is a control that meters either air or fuel or a combination of both. It doesn't have to have a throttle body to have a throttle, if that was the case you could say nearly every idi diesel doesn't have a throttle.
@@crf80fdarkdays Aviation Law is written in blood. There are reasons for standardization in professional aviation for a reason. But you can argue with regulators and airline pilots. Be my guest.
For anyone interested, Brian Shul gave a talk at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory about his experience as a pilot in the Blackbird many years ago. There's a video on their channel from that day. He told a story that nobody else could about a life that nobody else lived.
I just wrote it in a reply to someone about the amazing pictures and his cheeky tactics with his co to get some amazing shots. I had his book sled driver, an amazing read... He passed away not too long back, after what he went through back in Vietnam he had an amazing 50 extra years and lived his days with nothing stopping him or getting in his way. He was a keen photographer of nature and inspired people with his talks and I love his 5 minute video of 'speedcheck'.
His LA speed check story is still my favorite of the SR-71 stories. His entire journey to becoming a SR-71 pilot at all is insane. He had the right stuff.
And for it to be two V8s with straight pipes is about the most American solution possible. Well, maybe second after the explosive starters as seen in the B-52, but I think it rates higher than using shotgun blanks. But only just.
I got to sit in the cockpit of the only surviving B variant this pass summer. Met a bunch of former pilots and other crew members. Was the coolest thing I have ever done
Сейчас я пью пиво и сижу на ютубе. Внезапно мне попалось это видео, и я решил его посмотреть. Первые пару секунд звук был оригинальным, а потом внезапно появился русская речь, озвученая нейросетью. Сказать, что я удивился - значит ничего не сказать. Спасибо, что ты предусмотрел много аудиодорожек на разных языках. Хоть это и смутило меня, но это очень приятно
Ты скорей всего попал в аб-тест встроенного нейронного перевода Ютуба, либо у тебя дополнительный плагин. У меня никаких выборов языка нет, если не считать возможности перевода автоматических субтитров.
У меня на первых секундах видео не было ориг звука, сразу перевод пошёл. Но лучше б наняли человека переводить, нейронка криво озвучила это всё, особенно режут слух ударения и произношение названия компании Lockheed Martin
@@fuqupal the b21 raider is a successor to the b2 spirit, not the sr71 blackbird. b21 is a slow & stealthy bomber (just like b2) while sr71 is a fast & loud weaponless recon craft. b21 can't even exceed mach 1, let alone mach 3+.
I was fortunate enough to hear an SR-71 pilot speak at EAA in Oshkosh. What an awesome evening. I was able to touch a piece at the event as the pilot carried one for that reason. That night I was able to clamber into a P-38 that was onsite. Fast forward a year and I was at Dayton and was allowed to go behind the ropes after hours and actually touch the 71 and A12 there. Amazing! I was able to climb a ladder and put my hands on the XB-70 engines the same evening. Felt like a kid in the candy store!!!
I loved those seminars at the museum when I lived near OSH. I was able to get in the Mosquito Bomber, Paul's P-51, the B-25 and several other planes. My daughter and I met and spoke to Hoot Gibson.
My late uncle was a naval flight instructor for a rather well known naval combat tactics school. As a kid that loved all things aviation and wanted to join the Air Force, a dream that type 1 diabetes would latter rob me of forever, (he wasn’t a fan of that lol), he would send me things a lot. Many times it was paperwork, things like technical manuals for the various aircraft they flew, flew against, and needed to be able to identify. He sent me something I imagine he would have been in trouble for if they had known. It was a pretty decent sized aircraft identification and information book of the SR-71. It had a lot of information in it obviously. I decided to do a book report about it for school when I was in the 3rd - 5th grade, it was somewhere in there. I got a C- on it because my teacher said the numbers and some of my facts were wrong. I protested that I was right. The next day he had one of the books from our library on aircraft and stated the same top speed of MACH 3.2 and ceiling of 90,000ft, you always hear about the Black Bird. I said that those books were wrong and I had a better one. My teacher said to bring it the next day and if it was in the book he’d fix my grade. So I brought the book my uncle sent. When I pulled that thing out should have seen my teachers eyes! See, he was an ex naval aviator himself, something I didn’t know at the time. He took me out in the hall and started asking me a lot of questions about how did I get it and stuff like that. I told the truth, I didn’t know any better. We go back in the room and he looks it over as the class reads quietly to themselves. I keep watching him and his eyes kept getting wider and wider. I guess some of it was news to him as well. He brought the book and my corrected, now A+, paper back to me. He left the room and came back about ten minutes later. He asked if he could read the book some more and give it back the next day, I said sure. The next day I get called to the office, about an hour before that class. My teacher, the principal, and my MOM are all there. I found out that what my uncle had given me had only recently been partially declassified and my teacher didn’t know this when he saw the book. I was given my A+, but the paper was destroyed by my teacher. The book was given back, but was now missing the very pages with the, apparently, still secret information. My mom and I were told no one was getting in trouble, including my uncle. But, those numbers were never to cross my lips or to be written again. Apparently my uncle did catch some heat about it, but wasn’t in too much trouble and wasn’t demoted. He had proof that the book was given to him as it was when I got it, and was considered as declassified. The military had missed the information as they had only looked at Air Force, and CIA, documentation I’m assuming. This is as somehow forgotten about and slipped through the cracks. I still won’t say what I read or wrote, but I will say that the information considered to be the “accurate” numbers are 100% wrong. It was capable of a lot more. The highest stated numbers in this are closer, but still not high enough on either specification. The video is way closer than anything else I’ve ever seen on here though. Great work!
About the number of people needed to maintain the airplane: I remember a story by a colleague who was Belgian ex-airforce. When they were out on joint operations, he saw how the Belgian maintenance crew of the F-16s was just a few people, while the same crew for the same bird on the American side was five to ten times larger. Same work, just much more segmented on the USA teams vs multitasking on the Belgian teams. I'm just putting that out there, as it could indicate that the number or people on a plane maintenance crew doesn't necessarily make a significant metric.
I wonder how they compared in terms of turnaround time, quality of work and quality of experience. Assuming the US maintainers rotated through the tasks I imagine they'd end up learning more than the Belgians just because they can focus on one thing at a time.
While stationed at Kadena AB, Okinawa, I delivered some items to the flight line. I parked my 2.5-ton truck in the designated safe zone area. All of the sudden, the Habu engines roar for testing. I was 50 yards away and managed to rock the truck back and forth like a toy. To say that I got scared to death is an understatement!
Your video cleared up my question of why the SR-71 was retired because of the fact that all the final 71's had similar hours. Hey can you explain sometime what goes into aircraft life hours? and your camera explanation was great!
Maintenance in aviation is based into flight hours. Fuselage, structure, engines, avionics, hydrolics, electric, all major systems in general must be inspected and if necessary repaired/replaced when they reach a certain number of flight hours set by the manufacturers. Furthermore there's a maximum flight hours number where these systems must be replaced regardless of their condition. For example hydrolics must be inspected every 200 flight hours and replaced when they reach 2000 hours. Same goes with all systems and the engines. Precaution even though it's very expensive is the only way to minimise any risks that can compromise flight safety. Flight hours isn't the only factor for the maintenance of an airplane. The other one is flight cycles.The cycle is calculated from starting the engines, taxiing, take off, climb to operational altitude, descent, landing, taxiing and shutting down the engines. Two aircraft may have the same flight hours but a large difference in flight cycles. One aircraft may have flown fewer long haul flights while the other more short haul flights. The second aircraft with the most cycles is more stressed than the first. Inspection and maintenance is therefore performed when an aircraft completes either the flight hours limit or the flight cycle limit whichever comes first. Hope I've helped. English isn't my native language
Well obviously you failed to make some connection here as the SR-71B used for training had one thousand more hours than the front line SR-71s. That isn't why it was retired. They manage the hours because the worst thing you can do is run multiple aircraft into phased inspection time at the same time. I'm not sure what the SR-71 community called it but in the F-16 community it was phased inspections. Once an aircraft hit it's due time for those inspections it wasn't allowed to fly again until the inspection was completed. With front line units only having three SR-71s if you don't manage those airframe hours having two SR-71s at the same place grounded for inspections is the worst thing you could do. Say the third one was set to go on a flight and it breaks down and needs maintenance then you have precisely zero aircraft FMC or PMC.
@@Stubbies2003 If I understand correctly, there are only I think three situations where you can break that rule: 1. The Aircraft needs to be flown somewhere for the inspection to be done 2. The base is about to be attacked, and you need every aircraft in the air _NOW_ 3. The base is about to fall, and you opt to get the aircraft out rather than destroy it. It should be noted, that if 2 or 3 happen, something has gone _horribly_ wrong, and I imagine that 1 is a rare situation anyway (mostly seen with helicopters operating close to the front lines)
Ive watched a lot of documentaries about this bird and it still amazes me how badass this thing was. What blows my mind is this thing was made in the 60's where people still thought smoking was good for their health and cigarettes used asbestor filters. 😅
Kent cigarettes. I smoked a couple of cartons of them because they were on special at 50 cents per carton. The Asbestos made a good filter, you could hardly taste the tobacco.
In my opinion, your best work yet. Soooo much new info on a topic I love and have revisited over and over. Great visials, too. The shot of the 2 'birds in tandem was the coolest.
The other limit to the SR-71's range was the number of times it could re-light the engine or afterburners, which was usually 16. Due to the ridiculous amount of thermal heating experienced by the SR-71, they developed a new jet fuel blend (JP-7) with less volatility and thermal sensitivity; so it could be used as coolant. While it stopped the fuel from igniting accidentally, it also unfortunately made the fuel rather hard to ignite on purpose (to start the afterburners!). Instead of electrical or compression ignition, they were forced to use shots of TEB (a liquid that ignites powerfully and reliably on contact with oxygen/air) to ignite the afterburner instead. Unsurprisingly, they decided that it was a bad idea to attempt aerial refuelling of the TEB as it's another liquid to handle and keep separate (and one that ignites on contact with air, no less) - which meant that SR-71 mission planners had to carefully consider when to use the afterburner during a mission.
@stevea9604 the LN2 is what limited overall flight time. Initially the aircraft only had 2 dewar tanks, but they eventually added a third. Even if they ran out of TEB they had the catalyst ignition system. They just didn't like it.
The LN2 was the prime limiting factor for normal flight. The pilot could control how many AB uses they went through so if they didn't need to re-start the use could be as low as one each for each engine to start it up initially with. LN2 on the other hand absolutely had to be purged for every single refuel. So for long distance air time where it would have to go through multiple refuels LN2 was the prime factor.
an engineering marvel. I can't help but be continually amazed by it every time I learn something new about it. Those engineers were some amazing people
Pretty sure the spike moved forward to reduce the amount of air going into the engine. Most of the air by-passes the compressor and enters the compressor section via tubes. It's an amazing engine
So you seriously don't think they have WAY better shit now? This shit is 60 years old tech. They've moved on a long time ago. And as usual we are kept in the dark. Last shit I was updated on and is official just not in your face every day through bullshit media or popular culuture so you people as usual don't know about it, flies at mach 12. That's 4 times the speed of the blackbird. And we can only assume that it's not piloted but fully automated OR it flies in space.
I used to work with an engineer who had previously worked at Lockheed. He seemed to be a part of whatever engineering team inherited the legacy of the SR-71 blackbird. We were at an air and space museum that had an SR-71 and he looked for the radar on the bottom of the plane. He was pleased that it was still there, and he said the images from the SR-71 were not actually from photography, but from a radar. He said this like it was a secret, as if no one, not even the museum staff, had realized this critical piece of equipment was still on the aircraft.
It used film cameras up until sometime in the early 80’s. Then they transitioned to some type of synthetic aperture radar. This shift allowed for much greater reconnaissance gathering, as that system was less hampered by weather and it eliminated daylight requirements. A friend of mine was a reconnaissance officer on that plane for six or so years. Every time I got too close to asking classified questions he would smile and say “When SecDef talks about it on CNN I’ll tell you” and then he would smile broadly, usually indicating that my guesses weren’t far off the mark! Miss you Ed!
It used film cameras up until sometime in the early 80’s. Then they transitioned to some type of synthetic aperture radar. This shift allowed for much greater reconnaissance gathering, as that system was less hampered by weather and it eliminated daylight requirements. A friend of mine was a reconnaissance officer on that plane for six or so years. Every time I got too close to asking classified questions he would smile and say “When SecDef talks about it on CNN I’ll tell you” and then he would smile broadly, usually indicating that my guesses weren’t far off the mark! Miss you Ed!
@@chadstearns5087 The film camera was mounted on the nose on the SR-71. And they didn't always use the camera nose. A synthetic aperture radar nose may be installed instead, to go along with the side-scanning gear in the chine bays. They didn't have room for a long-lens camera in the fuselage any more because the RSO's back seat took up the space where the camera went in the A-12.
@@gr8crash probably efficiency. Meaning it consumed "less fuel per unit of length", not timewise. Though initially - yes, that would be true as well. Up to certain speed.
@jannegrey it wasn't even necessarily speed, but temperature. Temperatures a little warmer than standard the SR71 could be absolute Full AB burning too much fuel and not even make mach 3 causing mission aborts which did happen. Other days where it's a little colder than standard the SR71 could be comfortably flying at mach 3.2 and maybe being half way in the AB range. So while having "room to go" doesn't necessarily mean there's more speed available especially if they were already at the engine CIT limit of 427⁰c
@@Ben_Gunner Yeah. This is for basically true for every plane that has decent altitude ceiling. Heck - that is why you can fly long haul flights "easily".
So how do you guys deal with having missiles shot at you: F-16: I do my best Jeanty impression. F-22: I use stealth to keep them from seeing me in the first place. SR-71: I count to 58
I love the SR-71, it's probably my favorite plane, so I think I do most of these, but I'm sure (or at least hopeful) that there's something I don't know in this video instead of a watch, if you want to see the remaining SR-71B trainer version, it's on public display inside the Air Zoo museum in Kalamazoo, Michigan. They even have stairs that allow you to go up and peer through the cockpit windows, it's a spectacular exhibit
Seattle's Museum of Flight features an M21/D21 mated pair. The D21 was a drone, the M21 a SR-71 modified with pylons to carry the drone. Sadly, the engine was removed from the D21 and a simple tube installed in its place. A J58 engine is on display as well. The gallery smells of jet fuel...
@ was there just about a year ago! Wonderful exhibit. The Air Force Museum in Dayton has a YF-12 which was cool to see, and while there’s A-12s in a bunch of places, the one I remember seeing was at the Intrepid aircraft carrier museum in New York. I’ve seen most of the variants :)
15:10 third reason: the rate of fuel leaking is extremely closely linked to how full the tanks are; example: a full tank leaks (say) 1 gallon per minute, a half full tank loses only half a gal' per.
That wouldn't matter at all. When the SR was on the ground the leaking fuel was caught in drip pans, not buckets, so your estimate of leakage is probably excessive, but let's go with it anyway. If it lost fuel for a full hour at that rate, it's lost just 60 gallons, instead of 30, but a full load is over 12,200 gallons. Why would they be so concerned about 30 gallons (less than 0.25%) of fuel that they would rather fly a KC-135 and refuel mid-air? Yeah, nah! The ONLY reason that it took off with less than a full load of fuel is the landing gear. The blackbirds were designed specifically to fly as high and as fast as they could make it go, and in order to do that, they had to make it as lightweight as practical. Landing gear that can handle every take-off and potentially an occasional emergency landing(!) with a full fuel load will be considerably heavier than those that can routinely handle 15,000 pounds less, and that would've made it slower and cost several thousand feet of altitude throughout the entire flight profile on every flight. Interestingly, the primary reason that they refueled right after take-off was to purge the air from the tanks and allow the nitrogen to replace it. There were times when the mission plan didn't allow for refueling right after take-off though, and the procedure for that called for filling the tanks completely, and then draining fuel back down to take-off load while injecting nitrogen. In other words, they went to a lot of trouble to avoid taking off with a full load, and there's no way that keeping 30 gallons of fuel out of drip pans would be worth that. *For what it's worth, they actually took of with about 80% fuel capacity, so given your drip rates the "savings" would be closer to 11 gallons per hour.
It is insane how fast flight technology advanced in such a short time. I would love to know what is flying nowadays that we don't have any idea about and probably won't ever or atleast for a long time to come.
There is an amazing video by Brian Shaul sled driver. He somewhat was cheeky and took an amazing amount of pictures and made a book about his time as a SR-71 pilot and he did some amazing jaunts with keeping his hours current flying fast jets and taking trips in the refuellers to get shots. He knew that no one else was doing it and took so many he has the most pictures of anyone on the planet. RIP Brian.
During the Vietnam War, SR-71 Blackbird pilots developed a specific tactic to evade surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) launched by North Vietnamese forces. Upon detecting a missile launch, the crew would initiate a countdown from 58 seconds, corresponding to the approximate flight time of the SA-2 Guideline missile to their altitude. This countdown allowed the crew to anticipate the missile's approach and implement evasive maneuvers or rely on the aircraft's superior speed to outpace the threat.
All aircraft can do that depending on launch parameters. Not to be forgotten is that the burn time on missiles is rather short. At which point it becomes a glider. Pilots know this and can take advantage of that fact and turn to adjust aspect and force the missile to turn. Which expends some of it's now limited energy to do that turn. Every missile system has fairly well known maximum ranges. Especially against older static systems like the SA-2 if you know where the launcher is you can know the range needed to safely escape.
imagine the atc "hydraulics system a malfunction we are gonna turn back to land over" minutes later "well fuck system b hydraulics malfunction now" "how are you flying?"
It isn't the flying that is the challenge as the engines will work without hyd systems just fine. Now controlling the direction and attitude of the aircraft is another matter entirely at that point.
As for the maximum speed - one key note is that Mach number changes with air pressure and temperature. In some atmospheric conditions, Mach 3.3 is faster in raw miles per hour than in others. The hard limit of the inlet cones of Mach 3.55 is indeed a _Mach_ limit. Thus based on the conditions, that could be faster or slower ground speed. Also, one key thing is that the Mach number is lower in miles per hour of airspeed in thinner air - so Mach 3.55 at the altitude the SR-71 flies is slower than Mach 3.55 would be at sea level. (And no, SR-71 can't go Mach 3 at sea level, or anywhere near it. The atmosphere is so thick the atmospheric friction heating would melt even the titanium.)
@@johnp5250 You mean the same SpaceX that APPEARS independent but gets government funds? The same SpaceX that had "self-landing rockets" when you could clearly see birds fly BACKWARDS in the background and now that is has been pointed out by MILLIONS of people who can actually OBSERVE stuff and think for themselves, you can hardly find these videos anymore and if you do the birds have been digitally removed? That SpaceX? YOU'RE A SUCKER!
It's always interesting to see the difference between general aviation and military operations. Theoretical max speed : 3.55, in use, max : 3.3. 3.55 because after that, the engine will break. In general aviation, they have 4 engines but can fly safely with 2. x)
@@makantahi3731 In some country, family does. But my remark was more to said that the goal is different as the consequences. That engine is push to it's limits to perform best. For an A380 civilian aircraft, the performance is not the speed or most advanced technology, it's just transporting things/people and doing that safe.
That wasn't necessarily because it was a military aircraft, as the A-12 and many X-planes were flown that way too, but weren't military. It's mostly due to the fact that it was designed specifically to be flown in a very particular way. So, it makes sense that it's typical mission profile would be close to it's maximum performance capability.
@@MarkusMöttus-x7jdidn't buzz the tower.. there was a cessna flying way out near california and he asked for a speed check... then a twin bonansa... the rest..., Brian Shaul tells the story for 5 mins, I always pee myself laughing at it go and watch it!
Could you imagine back in the day being a county on the receiving end of the Blackbird? Knowing that sultry foxy beast was above your country going uncontested 😬
Interesting information about the world's fastest (disclosed) aircraft. Sometime we may hear about the SR-72 that is rumored to be much faster. This is an amazing design from an era when engineers used slide rules, no computers. Kelly Johnson's Skunk Works crowning achievement.
Yep add in a normal airframe for military purposes is around 5000 hours at normal speeds and altitude cycles and these were fling 40 years after being made is a disaster waiting to happen. The U2s are still around though...
@@slarratt That would only be a legitimate comparison if the SR-71 was also built and skinned using aluminum like normal fighters. Obviously that couldn't be the cause due to the heating at speed. Aluminum would become soft at the temperatures the SR-71 endured. No you and dol_arts are both wrong on this one. lgb-fjb is correct.
Not even close. I've seen leaked pictures with what looks like to me an oxygen port for aerial refueling. I'm pretty sure they at least tried feeding oxygen directly to the ramjets to get even higher and faster. The pilots wear spacesuits anyway. I couldn't see an RCS package but it was a pretty tight shot at the cockpit.
@@jtjames79 and how much oxygen they had and how long they could fly with that oxygen when they had a problem with the amount of nitrogen they could carry
@@makantahi3731 The same way I assume a fire hydrant isn't a spigot for watering a lawn. If you have a better idea why the SR-71 would need a large volume of something cryogenic feel free to post your own hypothesis. I'm also open to the idea that they were trying a pre-pooler like saber, but they really didn't have the manufacturing technology for that. It could have still been a possible prototype. SR-71 was a research aircraft as well. They did all sorts of things they never told us about.
Я учился в московском авиационном институте, знакомый с детства с технической эстетикой радио-, навигационного-, локационного.. и прочего оборудования. Высочайшая школа! При этом мог её сравнивать её с немецкой, британской и русской школами.. Очень жаль, что прогресс технологии уничтожил эту романтику повсеместно. Храню коллекцию деталей той эпохи, но никто уже этого не понимает! И даже не знает запаха Шеллака и Лигроина в приборах...😢
Y'know, sometimes I dislike when ads for merch are inserted into a vid in a slick/sneaky manner- like 'Oh... Wait a sec?!! ...How long have I been watching an ad?!', etc. (/spectrum)... The foregoing is only an attempt at some constructive criticism, though I do have a B.S. degree (well, it's a B.A, but, y'know!) ...That said, it is definitely a classy... chronometer! (Lol, my grandfather, a career naval aviator- NOT a 'pilot'- an aviator... He always corrected me when I asked about his 'watch') Good vid, as usual, too! Cheers!
I was a cartographer working for the Defense Mapping Agency in St Louis when the Egyptians and other Arab countries surprised the Israeli in the Yom Kippur War in 1973. After the Israeli regained their footing and fought their way across the Sinai, they crossed the Suez Canal and were occupying Egypt proper when there was a ceasefire. The Defense Mapping Agency was charged with bringing all of the maps up-to-date along the canal. The US used SR-71s to take new photos that we used in updating the maps in the area. We worked in 8 hour shifts 24 hours per day until all of the relevant maps were completed.
When I was working at NASA at Edwards Airforce Base back in the 90's, the SR-71 would be flown quite often on test missions. One of the cool things happened in the control room on every mission it flew, after MAC 2.5 and 100,000 feet all data in the control room would be displayed as "zeros" as the height and speed were all classified, even to this day.
@@gr8crash Sorry your wrong. Try googling the SR71 and you will see that speed, height and a few others are still classified to this date. Even some of the pilots of the Sr-71 have said they are not able to speak to the limits of the plane for classified reasons. Did you ever work for NASA? If not, than you have no idea what you are talking about. the plane for testing that was given to NASA was specifically for very high altitude flights above 100,000 feet and was for a classified program that I can't talk about.
@MrLou345 virtually everything you just said is incorrect. Again all of that information is declassified and public and has been for over 2 decades. Pilots are and freely do talk about everything from their time on the aircraft. The ONLY aspects still classified are parts of the ECM/DEF equipment as it's still in use today. But speeds, altitudes etc it's all public knowledge. Also I know the person who was in charge of SR71 flight test for NASA while it was there. The aircraft was never specially modified for flights that high as the aircraft couldn't even fly that high.
@@gr8crash Wait no IIRC the ECM equipment is dec. also, the name is out there along with its performance. IIRC it isn't a full-fledged one like the ones you'll see on an EA-18 or F-4G WW, it's rather simple.
Lt.Col. Anthony (Tony) Bevacqua (USAF-Retired) is a member of a very exculsive club consisting of pilots who flew both the U-2 and SR-71 operationally. I believe the number is less than twenty. Thank you Lt. Col. (USAF-Retired).
The F-14 did M2.6+ and was lot less fussy. It served in interceptor, fighter, bomber, and reconnaissance rolls. It’s still the coolest military plane ever.
I wouldn't call those "freak" accidents when those aircraft were pushing the laws of physics to the breaking point every second they were flying. I'm surprised any survived.
Go to bit.ly/HabuNWYT and use code NWYT to get an additional 15% off your pre-order and secure your piece of history with the limited-edition SR-71 Habu.
Gosh the SR71 is my favorite plane ever to be created, I wish I wasn't a broke student I would love that watch, but I can't afford not to eat or pay rent on my savings.
2000 usd for a watch 😭😭
You're obviously European so why do you say Fahrenheit instead of Celsius?
It also makes sense to say it in Celsius since you probably have international audience and there are only 2 countries of the 195 countries in the world that uses Fahrenheit
Home Depot and navy times merchant tile bank Nick Chicago trading floor with correct procedure a lot more than usd
There is a repetition error at 15:30
When i think you can't possibly teach me anything new about the SR-71 in TH-cam, you came up with original footage and new tidbits of info.
Great work.
I came here to say that too like what? I’ve heard everything including the pilot podcass lol. Thanks OP
I agree, this is one of the most informative SR-71 videos I've ever seen.
Glad you all know so much about them but tell me how close have you ever been to one IRL or are you just window shooper counterfeits?
@@robsim4692 Most witnesses were window shopoers, even the ones stationed at the same base. You just didn't walk up on them thanks to the SAC trained killers who launched them. So, I'd guess I've been within 300 yds of one, but on the other side of the fence.
I was working on the SR-71 when it was finally cancelled by Clinton in October 1997. During this time, the military had installed a data link on the SR-71. The data link was installed in a camera bay forward of the front landing gear. The data link antenna radome protruded down into the shockwave coming off the nose of the aircraft, so the pilot to watch how he banked the aircraft or the shockwave coming off the radome would go into the engine inlet and cause an unstart. Both of the aircraft that we flew, 967 and 971, are now part of museums, and I have been told that one of them has that radome installed, but I'm not sure which of the two since they aren't located close to each other (one in Oregon and the other in Louisiana), it's kind of hard to verify which one.
Very interesting.. I've heard that when supersonic if the engine conditions weren't perfect, the engine itself could "swallow" the shockwave coming off the inlet air cone and cause a flame out, from my understanding the SR-71's intake nose cone's are hydraulically/mechanically adjusted
Миг 25 отучил эту птичку летать и да он не выглядел как космолёт неземного происхождения . Инженеры были на высоком уровне создавшие самолёт с подобными скоростями , но гораздо более удобный в обслуживании.
Так была течь топлива у SR-71 или нет?
👍
@@sergeykhadyev that thing ugly as hell bro
Crazy that its 50s tech
50's AND 60's tech🙌
It's probably 1930's tech. It just went on records in the 50's.
Imagine what they have today! The sentient world simulation project comes to mind.
And that's already 15 years old by now.
That's why when ever some one says that they are worried about Russian or Chinese tech, i tell them we literally experimented with EVERYTHING they are doing now 40+ years ago.
and yet some people still believe earth is flat and science is conspiracy
@@fuqupalbruh?? Jet engine patent was filed in 30s. Most planes at that time was made of canvas and wood.
I will always, always have a soft spot for the A-12/SR-71. As a kid I was fascinated by the impossibly cool and futuristic shape of the airframe, as a teenager I spent an obscene amount of time geeking over its stats and the stories of the people that flew it, and as an adult, my now husband proposed to me underneath the one that’s displayed outside of the San Diego Air and Space Museum. I think that the Blackbird is one of the greatest engineering achievements of the human race. It pushed the boundaries of what was possible, and it looked ridiculously badass while doing it. Gotta love it.
Come to Seattle...we have a M21/D21 mated pair at the Museum of Flight!
The D21 isn't 100% accurate, as the engine was removed.
Did you watch D.A.R.R.Y.L
50 times like I did?I love that thing the first time I saw it I was literally speechless I was trying to tell my Dad how incredibly Awesome It looked but I couldn't talk, That's the one and only time I was rendered speechless! thanks for sharing Your passion for this masterpiece of engineering
and Breathtakingly powerful machine so elegant and beautiful at the same time!
The A12 Archangel is such a metal name 🥶
Brother, I’m a 15 year veteran of the US Navy. Spent my career as an FMF corpsman with Marines. I just wanted to chime in and tell you how impressed I am with your content. I love to see and hear the passion you have as it’s so palpable in your videos. You clearly do your research. I love seeing you touring American machines. I love that you’re reaching out to PAO’s to ask for this kind of exposure. It reminds me of something my dad told me when I enlisted in 1995. He passed yesterday so my heart is so happy that watching this video immediately put great memories of him to the forefront of my mind. Thank you for that. Truly. I needed the break from the sadness. Anyway, he’d told me… “never be afraid to ask for exactly what you want or need. The worst they could say, is no.” (Which, by the way… is NOT the worse thing they can say!🤣)
I’m proud of your growth. I’m proud that we have folks like you who have a true passion and brings real and true information to the people. I’m proud to be a member of your channel. Thanks for all you do! I have mad respect for you, brother. Cheers mate! 🤙🏻
Wow. Say that was really interesting. Wow. Like, say.
5:07 “What was it doing over the Philippines?”
Whatever tf it wanted.
(Yes, ik it was turning, I was trying to be funny.)
It was actually making a left turn to return to base..... . At that speed it takes that long and wide to turn.
They lost an engine, which compelled them to head to the Phillipines for an emergency landing. Minutes later they got a B Hydro light and rode it out until the system failed. Then they ejected.
Ita like the chuck noris of aircraft lol
It was there minding it's own business, definitely not spying...
What about shoot down a... No? That's what I thought...
My #1 favorite plane. Thanks for covering it! Amazing feat of engineering and the Skunk's finest work.
Same here man!
And it truly is!😍🙌
This plane and the A-10 Warthog are my favs. Helicopters I would have to say the Apache.
@poolhalljunkie9 good taste!!!
I pulled guard duty on one night and I let my future wife look in and around back in 71. The ground unit was cool with the 2 v8s and 2 4s.
@garrypeek897 Now that's one heck of a date! Thanks for replying!
The SR-71 dodging and not bypassing missiles is such a power move
At M3.3, you're not 'dodging' anything - the turning-radius is approx 100 miles!! The only tools you've got are speed and altitude.
SR-71 cannot dodge anything.
AA missiles of the day might have gone fast enough in level flight, but the climb to 80,000 feet would burn out its fuel.
Só bastava subir e ficavam fora de alcance dos mísseis, que pássaro preto rápido.
A couple of things not mentioned that were critical to the SR. First the liquid Nitrogen wasn’t used for starting or running the engines. If an engine quit in flight it was called an “unstart”. The TEB was used to restart the engine. No TEB, no restart. All this had to happen when the airframe is suffering from severe stresses from having power on one side but none on the other. One thing that most people don’t mentioning is the very high flash point for the JP 7. You could drop a lit match into the puddles on the ground and all they would do is go out. Lastly, one “trick” fastmover used to tell if a missile has them targeted was if the crew could see the missiles exhaust. Off to the left or right, they weren’t the target. If you don’t see the exhaust, you’d best time your evasive maneuver. It took a lot of guts because you had to wait until the missile was too close to maneuver with you. Or, if your in the SR, you just throttle up and out ran it!
Not mentioned?
He did explain the purpose of the liquid nitrogen (as an inert atmosphere to prevent fuel-vapour ignition in the head-space in the fuel tanks).
Exactly as mentioned he never talked about using LN to restart but for tank inerting. At the temperatures that aircraft got to at speed this was a very real concern. Not mentioned but a prime reason why they had to purge the LN for refueling is the same reason fighters depressurize their systems to get gas. At full pressure the tanker wouldn't be able to transfer fuel to the recipient aircraft. So having to purge then refill the tanks as needed with nitrogen to inert the tanks would be a prime limiting factor for normal flight operations.
Also, TEB was used to light off the afterburners so no TEB no afterburner too. So no excessive jockeying of the throttle in and out of AB for those guys like you can see in fighter jets.
true about the fuel. I was an Army rotary wing refueler and the JP8 we used, you could drop a burning torch into it and it would go out. Getting those vapors to catch was an exercise in patience if you wanted to use it to burn something.
The fact this aircraft was designed in the 50s and 60s and people think we can't design something faster is crazy people also not believing the F-22 and 35 are stealthy is hilarious
The SR-72 "Son of Blackbird" has been in development since 2003 and in the past year or so Skunkworks leadership has said it's already flying. Assuming they aren't just playing coy and the SR-72 IS actually flying, then the US has an aircraft capable of over Mach 6 with the potential to be not only a recon plane, but a fully fledged weapons delivery platform for hypersonic missiles.
It’s not that we can’t it’s that there’s no need to. There are many missiles and jet powered craft that FAR EXCEED what the blackbird could do.
It is all part of a misinformation plan for a possible opposition to believe that they have a chance. Otherwise they might resolve to use more drastic measures, like suicidal missions of mutual annihilation......
@@cruisinguy6024. Exactly, that's where the type of mission dictated by a political situation would require such capabilities..... . A scenario in which further escalation needs to be avoided while achieving the political objectives.
@@HalRiveria. When they tell you it is flying, that means that it has been flying for quite sometime already. Probably much more earlier than what they are telling you..... The general public doesn't needs to know, unless they need to know!
That was the only advertisement in all of TH-cam I didn't skip!
I want one of these stealthwatches!
hell yeah! I'm not even a watch man myself but dammmm... i dribbled 😂
What ads?
@fuqupal well more of the sponser for the video
Same. I'm not a watch person either but that has to be the coolest time piece I've ever seen. I knew it was gonna be expensive but just shy of $2k USD is a bit much for me.
@@drkilledbydeath87 Knowing the price of luxury watches, I feared it would cost much more... but how awful it is to be poor!
Erm, Maury Rosenburg talks about the missle incident on the peninsula Seniors video channel on youtube, the radar warning light is a P for painting. Then a L for launch, this launch was 99% of the time simulated and the sro would then electrically 'ping the missle with a known frequency. In this incident the missle answered so the radar guided missle was following a radar beam to an altitude above 85,000ft they were cruising at mach 3.1. To avoid the missle the pilot just increased the throttle. And the rso jams the signal between the missle and the control station. After a short time around 20 seconds the missle exploded around a similar altitude off to the right of the aircraft several miles away.
We jet pilots call them "Thrust levers", not throttle. There is no "throttle body" in a jet engine that I am aware of. Also, in turboprop aircraft, they are called "Power Levers" because you are increasing the engine power to drive the propellers.
@manho9877 engine revs? Variable pitch propellers? In the dash 800's we call them throttle levers. Are you USA based?
@@slarratt And I thought aviation standardized everything internationally! Ha!
@@manho9877a throttle is a throttle regardless of the engine, I get where your coming from but as somebody who is into anything with a motor I just want to say a throttle is a control that meters either air or fuel or a combination of both.
It doesn't have to have a throttle body to have a throttle, if that was the case you could say nearly every idi diesel doesn't have a throttle.
@@crf80fdarkdays Aviation Law is written in blood. There are reasons for standardization in professional aviation for a reason. But you can argue with regulators and airline pilots. Be my guest.
For anyone interested, Brian Shul gave a talk at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory about his experience as a pilot in the Blackbird many years ago. There's a video on their channel from that day. He told a story that nobody else could about a life that nobody else lived.
I just wrote it in a reply to someone about the amazing pictures and his cheeky tactics with his co to get some amazing shots. I had his book sled driver, an amazing read... He passed away not too long back, after what he went through back in Vietnam he had an amazing 50 extra years and lived his days with nothing stopping him or getting in his way. He was a keen photographer of nature and inspired people with his talks and I love his 5 minute video of 'speedcheck'.
His LA speed check story is still my favorite of the SR-71 stories. His entire journey to becoming a SR-71 pilot at all is insane. He had the right stuff.
Having your starter more powerful than some supercars is mental
Edit: spelling
And for it to be two V8s with straight pipes is about the most American solution possible. Well, maybe second after the explosive starters as seen in the B-52, but I think it rates higher than using shotgun blanks. But only just.
Than*
I love how LM said it's not a good idea, rather than the plane can't do that when asked if they could do 3.5
I got to sit in the cockpit of the only surviving B variant this pass summer. Met a bunch of former pilots and other crew members. Was the coolest thing I have ever done
Сейчас я пью пиво и сижу на ютубе. Внезапно мне попалось это видео, и я решил его посмотреть. Первые пару секунд звук был оригинальным, а потом внезапно появился русская речь, озвученая нейросетью. Сказать, что я удивился - значит ничего не сказать. Спасибо, что ты предусмотрел много аудиодорожек на разных языках. Хоть это и смутило меня, но это очень приятно
Ты скорей всего попал в аб-тест встроенного нейронного перевода Ютуба, либо у тебя дополнительный плагин. У меня никаких выборов языка нет, если не считать возможности перевода автоматических субтитров.
плюсую, у меня есть на выбор языков 8, много разных, в том числе и ру озвучка
Отстой перевод. Ударения и грамматика ушли из чата...😢
Дебильная озвучка. ИИ пока лишь игрушка
У меня на первых секундах видео не было ориг звука, сразу перевод пошёл.
Но лучше б наняли человека переводить, нейронка криво озвучила это всё, особенно режут слух ударения и произношение названия компании Lockheed Martin
“What a cool watch! I think I’ll check it out” *looks at the price* “never mind!”
Yeah, absolutely absurd price tag on that thing 🤢🤮
Same lol
i wonder what a modern build with newer tech would cost?
@@CommanderJPS B-21 Raider. Officially announced in 2022.
@@fuqupal the b21 raider is a successor to the b2 spirit, not the sr71 blackbird. b21 is a slow & stealthy bomber (just like b2) while sr71 is a fast & loud weaponless recon craft. b21 can't even exceed mach 1, let alone mach 3+.
I was fortunate enough to hear an SR-71 pilot speak at EAA in Oshkosh. What an awesome evening. I was able to touch a piece at the event as the pilot carried one for that reason. That night I was able to clamber into a P-38 that was onsite. Fast forward a year and I was at Dayton and was allowed to go behind the ropes after hours and actually touch the 71 and A12 there. Amazing! I was able to climb a ladder and put my hands on the XB-70 engines the same evening. Felt like a kid in the candy store!!!
I loved those seminars at the museum when I lived near OSH. I was able to get in the Mosquito Bomber, Paul's P-51, the B-25 and several other planes. My daughter and I met and spoke to Hoot Gibson.
@DblIre that is so cool!!! They have such amazing programs there. Was that Ms Mitchell for the 25?
My late uncle was a naval flight instructor for a rather well known naval combat tactics school. As a kid that loved all things aviation and wanted to join the Air Force, a dream that type 1 diabetes would latter rob me of forever, (he wasn’t a fan of that lol), he would send me things a lot. Many times it was paperwork, things like technical manuals for the various aircraft they flew, flew against, and needed to be able to identify. He sent me something I imagine he would have been in trouble for if they had known. It was a pretty decent sized aircraft identification and information book of the SR-71. It had a lot of information in it obviously. I decided to do a book report about it for school when I was in the 3rd - 5th grade, it was somewhere in there. I got a C- on it because my teacher said the numbers and some of my facts were wrong. I protested that I was right. The next day he had one of the books from our library on aircraft and stated the same top speed of MACH 3.2 and ceiling of 90,000ft, you always hear about the Black Bird. I said that those books were wrong and I had a better one. My teacher said to bring it the next day and if it was in the book he’d fix my grade. So I brought the book my uncle sent. When I pulled that thing out should have seen my teachers eyes! See, he was an ex naval aviator himself, something I didn’t know at the time. He took me out in the hall and started asking me a lot of questions about how did I get it and stuff like that. I told the truth, I didn’t know any better. We go back in the room and he looks it over as the class reads quietly to themselves. I keep watching him and his eyes kept getting wider and wider. I guess some of it was news to him as well. He brought the book and my corrected, now A+, paper back to me. He left the room and came back about ten minutes later. He asked if he could read the book some more and give it back the next day, I said sure. The next day I get called to the office, about an hour before that class. My teacher, the principal, and my MOM are all there. I found out that what my uncle had given me had only recently been partially declassified and my teacher didn’t know this when he saw the book. I was given my A+, but the paper was destroyed by my teacher. The book was given back, but was now missing the very pages with the, apparently, still secret information. My mom and I were told no one was getting in trouble, including my uncle. But, those numbers were never to cross my lips or to be written again. Apparently my uncle did catch some heat about it, but wasn’t in too much trouble and wasn’t demoted. He had proof that the book was given to him as it was when I got it, and was considered as declassified. The military had missed the information as they had only looked at Air Force, and CIA, documentation I’m assuming. This is as somehow forgotten about and slipped through the cracks.
I still won’t say what I read or wrote, but I will say that the information considered to be the “accurate” numbers are 100% wrong. It was capable of a lot more. The highest stated numbers in this are closer, but still not high enough on either specification. The video is way closer than anything else I’ve ever seen on here though. Great work!
About the number of people needed to maintain the airplane: I remember a story by a colleague who was Belgian ex-airforce. When they were out on joint operations, he saw how the Belgian maintenance crew of the F-16s was just a few people, while the same crew for the same bird on the American side was five to ten times larger. Same work, just much more segmented on the USA teams vs multitasking on the Belgian teams. I'm just putting that out there, as it could indicate that the number or people on a plane maintenance crew doesn't necessarily make a significant metric.
good info for ukraine and their F-16's . they may not need 35 maintainers per plane.
I wonder how they compared in terms of turnaround time, quality of work and quality of experience. Assuming the US maintainers rotated through the tasks I imagine they'd end up learning more than the Belgians just because they can focus on one thing at a time.
While stationed at Kadena AB, Okinawa, I delivered some items to the flight line. I parked my 2.5-ton truck in the designated safe zone area. All of the sudden, the Habu engines roar for testing. I was 50 yards away and managed to rock the truck back and forth like a toy. To say that I got scared to death is an understatement!
Your video cleared up my question of why the SR-71 was retired because of the fact that all the final 71's had similar hours. Hey can you explain sometime what goes into aircraft life hours? and your camera explanation was great!
Maintenance in aviation is based into flight hours. Fuselage, structure, engines, avionics, hydrolics, electric, all major systems in general must be inspected and if necessary repaired/replaced when they reach a certain number of flight hours set by the manufacturers. Furthermore there's a maximum flight hours number where these systems must be replaced regardless of their condition. For example hydrolics must be inspected every 200 flight hours and replaced when they reach 2000 hours. Same goes with all systems and the engines. Precaution even though it's very expensive is the only way to minimise any risks that can compromise flight safety.
Flight hours isn't the only factor for the maintenance of an airplane. The other one is flight cycles.The cycle is calculated from starting the engines, taxiing, take off, climb to operational altitude, descent, landing, taxiing and shutting down the engines. Two aircraft may have the same flight hours but a large difference in flight cycles. One aircraft may have flown fewer long haul flights while the other more short haul flights. The second aircraft with the most cycles is more stressed than the first. Inspection and maintenance is therefore performed when an aircraft completes either the flight hours limit or the flight cycle limit whichever comes first.
Hope I've helped. English isn't my native language
Mostly it was the cost and the fact you no longer needed it as satellite tech became much better.
Well obviously you failed to make some connection here as the SR-71B used for training had one thousand more hours than the front line SR-71s. That isn't why it was retired. They manage the hours because the worst thing you can do is run multiple aircraft into phased inspection time at the same time. I'm not sure what the SR-71 community called it but in the F-16 community it was phased inspections. Once an aircraft hit it's due time for those inspections it wasn't allowed to fly again until the inspection was completed. With front line units only having three SR-71s if you don't manage those airframe hours having two SR-71s at the same place grounded for inspections is the worst thing you could do. Say the third one was set to go on a flight and it breaks down and needs maintenance then you have precisely zero aircraft FMC or PMC.
@@Stubbies2003 Thanks for this explanation. I am going to have to read it a few times!
@@Stubbies2003 If I understand correctly, there are only I think three situations where you can break that rule:
1. The Aircraft needs to be flown somewhere for the inspection to be done
2. The base is about to be attacked, and you need every aircraft in the air _NOW_
3. The base is about to fall, and you opt to get the aircraft out rather than destroy it.
It should be noted, that if 2 or 3 happen, something has gone _horribly_ wrong, and I imagine that 1 is a rare situation anyway (mostly seen with helicopters operating close to the front lines)
اتمنى الاستمرار في دبلجه المقاطع وكذلك الاستمرار في الوثائقيات التي تتكلم عن سباق التسلح والاسلحة السرية والهندسه العسكرية شكرا لكم
Ive watched a lot of documentaries about this bird and it still amazes me how badass this thing was. What blows my mind is this thing was made in the 60's where people still thought smoking was good for their health and cigarettes used asbestor filters. 😅
Kent cigarettes. I smoked a couple of cartons of them because they were on special at 50 cents per carton. The Asbestos made a good filter, you could hardly taste the tobacco.
Yep prior to computers where to get something like this to work required a ton of wind tunnel testing and slide rules for the math.
In my opinion, your best work yet. Soooo much new info on a topic I love and have revisited over and over. Great visials, too.
The shot of the 2 'birds in tandem was the coolest.
The other limit to the SR-71's range was the number of times it could re-light the engine or afterburners, which was usually 16.
Due to the ridiculous amount of thermal heating experienced by the SR-71, they developed a new jet fuel blend (JP-7) with less volatility and thermal sensitivity; so it could be used as coolant. While it stopped the fuel from igniting accidentally, it also unfortunately made the fuel rather hard to ignite on purpose (to start the afterburners!). Instead of electrical or compression ignition, they were forced to use shots of TEB (a liquid that ignites powerfully and reliably on contact with oxygen/air) to ignite the afterburner instead. Unsurprisingly, they decided that it was a bad idea to attempt aerial refuelling of the TEB as it's another liquid to handle and keep separate (and one that ignites on contact with air, no less) - which meant that SR-71 mission planners had to carefully consider when to use the afterburner during a mission.
They had a backup AB ignition system if they ran out or had an issue with the TEB system
They had plenty of TEB. Never ran out during any mission.
What a sick looking aircraft 😍
Coolest jet powered aircraft in history!! 🙌
it does certainly make you look sick when you see the price tag 😂
@@CommanderJPS
True that 🙌😂😂
As far as I know, the limit of the SR 71 was not the liquid nitrogen, but the ~21 shots from the hypergolic propellant to start the afterburner
Was more the LN2. They had a backup ignition system
They were…depending on how many un-starts they had vs refueling stops…That dictated their flying time from what I know…
@stevea9604 the LN2 is what limited overall flight time. Initially the aircraft only had 2 dewar tanks, but they eventually added a third. Even if they ran out of TEB they had the catalyst ignition system. They just didn't like it.
The LN2 was the prime limiting factor for normal flight. The pilot could control how many AB uses they went through so if they didn't need to re-start the use could be as low as one each for each engine to start it up initially with. LN2 on the other hand absolutely had to be purged for every single refuel. So for long distance air time where it would have to go through multiple refuels LN2 was the prime factor.
@Stubbies2003 and even if/when they did run out, they could still fly supersonic, just limited to mach 2.8.
i stayed for the 1:20 video. Thank you for not burying the lede. Thumbs up. Good luck.
It’s a shame it was so expensive to run. The U2 which is like 10 times less interesting is still used…
Yes, although the U2 isn’t really used as a spy plane anymore, mostly awacs if I remember correctly
Lockheed Martin is working on the SR-72 Darkstar, AKA "Son of Blackbird". Should be in service sometime in the 2030s
@@bokoblinlogic1619Yeah I think it’s used by NASA for monitoring or something, which is interesting, but the plane isn’t very cool lol
@@dx-ek4vrsick
and he was shot down
an engineering marvel. I can't help but be continually amazed by it every time I learn something new about it. Those engineers were some amazing people
I like it that you also include SI units.
Pretty sure the spike moved forward to reduce the amount of air going into the engine. Most of the air by-passes the compressor and enters the compressor section via tubes. It's an amazing engine
I wish this aircraft was upgraded and still kept in service
Same here man, same here.. 😔
So you seriously don't think they have WAY better shit now?
This shit is 60 years old tech. They've moved on a long time ago.
And as usual we are kept in the dark.
Last shit I was updated on and is official just not in your face every day through bullshit media or popular culuture so you people as usual don't know about it, flies at mach 12.
That's 4 times the speed of the blackbird.
And we can only assume that it's not piloted but fully automated OR it flies in space.
I've watched dozens of films about SR-71 and I am still in awe how amazing this bird is.
I used to work with an engineer who had previously worked at Lockheed. He seemed to be a part of whatever engineering team inherited the legacy of the SR-71 blackbird.
We were at an air and space museum that had an SR-71 and he looked for the radar on the bottom of the plane. He was pleased that it was still there, and he said the images from the SR-71 were not actually from photography, but from a radar. He said this like it was a secret, as if no one, not even the museum staff, had realized this critical piece of equipment was still on the aircraft.
It used film cameras up until sometime in the early 80’s. Then they transitioned to some type of synthetic aperture radar.
This shift allowed for much greater reconnaissance gathering, as that system was less hampered by weather and it eliminated daylight requirements.
A friend of mine was a reconnaissance officer on that plane for six or so years. Every time I got too close to asking classified questions he would smile and say “When SecDef talks about it on CNN I’ll tell you” and then he would smile broadly, usually indicating that my guesses weren’t far off the mark!
Miss you Ed!
It used film cameras up until sometime in the early 80’s. Then they transitioned to some type of synthetic aperture radar.
This shift allowed for much greater reconnaissance gathering, as that system was less hampered by weather and it eliminated daylight requirements.
A friend of mine was a reconnaissance officer on that plane for six or so years. Every time I got too close to asking classified questions he would smile and say “When SecDef talks about it on CNN I’ll tell you” and then he would smile broadly, usually indicating that my guesses weren’t far off the mark!
Miss you Ed!
@@chadstearns5087 The film camera was mounted on the nose on the SR-71. And they didn't always use the camera nose. A synthetic aperture radar nose may be installed instead, to go along with the side-scanning gear in the chine bays.
They didn't have room for a long-lens camera in the fuselage any more because the RSO's back seat took up the space where the camera went in the A-12.
Grew up not far from Mildenhall and saw some of these and other US airforce craft flying over the house during my childhood. Was fascinated by it.
Can we get a round of applause for Kelly Johnson please?!
One of the most interesting videos I've seen on the blackbird. I'm pretty familiar with the lore, but this had lots of new tidbits. Thanks
Intresting fact missed, the faster it flew, the less fuel it consumed...
Probably because it's not a fact. It varies a lot.
@@gr8crash probably efficiency. Meaning it consumed "less fuel per unit of length", not timewise. Though initially - yes, that would be true as well. Up to certain speed.
@jannegrey it wasn't even necessarily speed, but temperature. Temperatures a little warmer than standard the SR71 could be absolute Full AB burning too much fuel and not even make mach 3 causing mission aborts which did happen. Other days where it's a little colder than standard the SR71 could be comfortably flying at mach 3.2 and maybe being half way in the AB range. So while having "room to go" doesn't necessarily mean there's more speed available especially if they were already at the engine CIT limit of 427⁰c
The higher it flys the less fuel it needs to maintain its cruise speed because the air gets thinner and the pilot can throttle down.
@@Ben_Gunner Yeah. This is for basically true for every plane that has decent altitude ceiling. Heck - that is why you can fly long haul flights "easily".
I was stationed at Beale AFB for a couple years and was always in awe of the SR-71 and U-2. Really enjoyed this video.
So how do you guys deal with having missiles shot at you:
F-16: I do my best Jeanty impression.
F-22: I use stealth to keep them from seeing me in the first place.
SR-71: I count to 58
Counting the time actually works universally, every other aircraft also does this for missile evasion.
I love the SR-71, it's probably my favorite plane, so I think I do most of these, but I'm sure (or at least hopeful) that there's something I don't know in this video
instead of a watch, if you want to see the remaining SR-71B trainer version, it's on public display inside the Air Zoo museum in Kalamazoo, Michigan. They even have stairs that allow you to go up and peer through the cockpit windows, it's a spectacular exhibit
Seattle's Museum of Flight features an M21/D21 mated pair.
The D21 was a drone, the M21 a SR-71 modified with pylons to carry the drone.
Sadly, the engine was removed from the D21 and a simple tube installed in its place.
A J58 engine is on display as well.
The gallery smells of jet fuel...
@ was there just about a year ago! Wonderful exhibit. The Air Force Museum in Dayton has a YF-12 which was cool to see, and while there’s A-12s in a bunch of places, the one I remember seeing was at the Intrepid aircraft carrier museum in New York. I’ve seen most of the variants :)
15:30 it was very important that we know the pictures were taken at 85,000ft
I used to see this as a meme channel but it has really improved
15:10 third reason:
the rate of fuel leaking is extremely closely linked to how full the tanks are;
example: a full tank leaks (say) 1 gallon per minute, a half full tank loses only half a gal' per.
That wouldn't matter at all. When the SR was on the ground the leaking fuel was caught in drip pans, not buckets, so your estimate of leakage is probably excessive, but let's go with it anyway. If it lost fuel for a full hour at that rate, it's lost just 60 gallons, instead of 30, but a full load is over 12,200 gallons. Why would they be so concerned about 30 gallons (less than 0.25%) of fuel that they would rather fly a KC-135 and refuel mid-air? Yeah, nah!
The ONLY reason that it took off with less than a full load of fuel is the landing gear. The blackbirds were designed specifically to fly as high and as fast as they could make it go, and in order to do that, they had to make it as lightweight as practical. Landing gear that can handle every take-off and potentially an occasional emergency landing(!) with a full fuel load will be considerably heavier than those that can routinely handle 15,000 pounds less, and that would've made it slower and cost several thousand feet of altitude throughout the entire flight profile on every flight.
Interestingly, the primary reason that they refueled right after take-off was to purge the air from the tanks and allow the nitrogen to replace it. There were times when the mission plan didn't allow for refueling right after take-off though, and the procedure for that called for filling the tanks completely, and then draining fuel back down to take-off load while injecting nitrogen. In other words, they went to a lot of trouble to avoid taking off with a full load, and there's no way that keeping 30 gallons of fuel out of drip pans would be worth that.
*For what it's worth, they actually took of with about 80% fuel capacity, so given your drip rates the "savings" would be closer to 11 gallons per hour.
It is insane how fast flight technology advanced in such a short time.
I would love to know what is flying nowadays that we don't have any idea about and probably won't ever or atleast for a long time to come.
Think of the views they got btw like oh my lord seeing the sun rise and set in such short time must look amazing
There is an amazing video by Brian Shaul sled driver. He somewhat was cheeky and took an amazing amount of pictures and made a book about his time as a SR-71 pilot and he did some amazing jaunts with keeping his hours current flying fast jets and taking trips in the refuellers to get shots. He knew that no one else was doing it and took so many he has the most pictures of anyone on the planet. RIP Brian.
Very nice work. Learned a lot more from you after thinking I'd heard everything that was unclassified. Thank you.
Shame the watch is so expensive, such a nice aircraft though, you should definitely talk about the YF-12 next.
i personally know a Sr 71 mantainance mechanic thats retired for years now. the guy is a genious.
During the Vietnam War, SR-71 Blackbird pilots developed a specific tactic to evade surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) launched by North Vietnamese forces. Upon detecting a missile launch, the crew would initiate a countdown from 58 seconds, corresponding to the approximate flight time of the SA-2 Guideline missile to their altitude. This countdown allowed the crew to anticipate the missile's approach and implement evasive maneuvers or rely on the aircraft's superior speed to outpace the threat.
Very comprehensive report on this fascinating aircraft.
A plane straight up outranging an anti-air missile is just badass
All aircraft can do that depending on launch parameters. Not to be forgotten is that the burn time on missiles is rather short. At which point it becomes a glider. Pilots know this and can take advantage of that fact and turn to adjust aspect and force the missile to turn. Which expends some of it's now limited energy to do that turn. Every missile system has fairly well known maximum ranges. Especially against older static systems like the SA-2 if you know where the launcher is you can know the range needed to safely escape.
@@Stubbies2003 This.
this is the best documentary of the sr71 bb I ever seen. 👍
imagine the atc
"hydraulics system a malfunction we are gonna turn back to land over"
minutes later
"well fuck system b hydraulics malfunction now"
"how are you flying?"
_Determination_
It isn't the flying that is the challenge as the engines will work without hyd systems just fine. Now controlling the direction and attitude of the aircraft is another matter entirely at that point.
@@Stubbies2003 c controlling the aircraft is like the difference between flying and falling
you cant fly an aircraft if you cant controll it
As for the maximum speed - one key note is that Mach number changes with air pressure and temperature. In some atmospheric conditions, Mach 3.3 is faster in raw miles per hour than in others. The hard limit of the inlet cones of Mach 3.55 is indeed a _Mach_ limit. Thus based on the conditions, that could be faster or slower ground speed.
Also, one key thing is that the Mach number is lower in miles per hour of airspeed in thinner air - so Mach 3.55 at the altitude the SR-71 flies is slower than Mach 3.55 would be at sea level. (And no, SR-71 can't go Mach 3 at sea level, or anywhere near it. The atmosphere is so thick the atmospheric friction heating would melt even the titanium.)
Im excited what the space force has in it's inventory
SpaceX rockets with a military coat of paint
The exact same things Air Force soace command hasld. Because it was rebranded and renamed like a frozen steak or cheap vodka
@@johnp5250 You mean the same SpaceX that APPEARS independent but gets government funds?
The same SpaceX that had "self-landing rockets" when you could clearly see birds fly BACKWARDS in the background and now that is has been pointed out by MILLIONS of people who can actually OBSERVE stuff and think for themselves, you can hardly find these videos anymore and if you do the birds have been digitally removed?
That SpaceX?
YOU'RE A SUCKER!
A new SR-71 video? Yes.
My most favourite bird other than Big Bird!😂
The watch is amazing. It is now on my Christmas list.
It's always interesting to see the difference between general aviation and military operations. Theoretical max speed : 3.55, in use, max : 3.3. 3.55 because after that, the engine will break. In general aviation, they have 4 engines but can fly safely with 2. x)
military personnel cannot sue the military like civilians would sue airlines for damages
@@makantahi3731 In some country, family does. But my remark was more to said that the goal is different as the consequences. That engine is push to it's limits to perform best. For an A380 civilian aircraft, the performance is not the speed or most advanced technology, it's just transporting things/people and doing that safe.
That wasn't necessarily because it was a military aircraft, as the A-12 and many X-planes were flown that way too, but weren't military. It's mostly due to the fact that it was designed specifically to be flown in a very particular way. So, it makes sense that it's typical mission profile would be close to it's maximum performance capability.
Well until you show us the GA aircraft that is flying over mach 3 this is an extremely apples to oranges comparison.
@@Stubbies2003 😘
Thank you for another entertaining and informative video!
Nice looking watch
I heard new information here
Great video thanks
Put "SR-71 speed check" into the TH-cam search. Very amusing.
Is that the story when they buzzed the tower in LA? 😂😂
No. It was when all the other planes were doing speed checks and a an SR-71 decided to chime in. It's funny as hell. @MarkusMöttus-x7j
@@MarkusMöttus-x7jdidn't buzz the tower.. there was a cessna flying way out near california and he asked for a speed check... then a twin bonansa... the rest..., Brian Shaul tells the story for 5 mins, I always pee myself laughing at it go and watch it!
@@fearthehoneybadgerfunny yes, true no
@@MarkusMöttus-x7j No that is a different story by another sled driver.
The fact that there was no audible warning for when a missile was coming towards you is insane.
32 Seconds ago is crazy
How is it crazy ?
Could you imagine back in the day being a county on the receiving end of the Blackbird? Knowing that sultry foxy beast was above your country going uncontested 😬
I'm curious what took you so long to do a habu video lol
Absolutely fascinating!! Just imagine what technology we have now!!
The watchmaker is full of shit
Interesting information about the world's fastest (disclosed) aircraft. Sometime we may hear about the SR-72 that is rumored to be much faster. This is an amazing design from an era when engineers used slide rules, no computers. Kelly Johnson's Skunk Works crowning achievement.
Why did the us military get rid of it?
Because some in congress thought satellites could take its job, plus the aircraft were incredibly expensive to maintain.
Analog controls plane cannot be upgraded anymore and the service life has already been reached. It like using a Nokia 5110 in 2024
Yep add in a normal airframe for military purposes is around 5000 hours at normal speeds and altitude cycles and these were fling 40 years after being made is a disaster waiting to happen. The U2s are still around though...
@@slarratt That would only be a legitimate comparison if the SR-71 was also built and skinned using aluminum like normal fighters. Obviously that couldn't be the cause due to the heating at speed. Aluminum would become soft at the temperatures the SR-71 endured. No you and dol_arts are both wrong on this one. lgb-fjb is correct.
SR-71: Catch me if you can Mr Sovietman!
I can be here there and gone, to infinity and beyond with 6 inches of throttle left!
Lol not accurate but funny
So it can go higher then mach 3.5 which means they stil not telling the the actual numbers
Not even close.
I've seen leaked pictures with what looks like to me an oxygen port for aerial refueling.
I'm pretty sure they at least tried feeding oxygen directly to the ramjets to get even higher and faster. The pilots wear spacesuits anyway.
I couldn't see an RCS package but it was a pretty tight shot at the cockpit.
@@jtjames79 and how much oxygen they had and how long they could fly with that oxygen when they had a problem with the amount of nitrogen they could carry
@@makantahi3731 I'm not privy to top secret government aeronautical tests. I just saw a few pictures that were sus.
ok, but why do you conclude that that oxygen was intended for combustion in the engine and not for the breathing of the crew
@@makantahi3731 The same way I assume a fire hydrant isn't a spigot for watering a lawn. If you have a better idea why the SR-71 would need a large volume of something cryogenic feel free to post your own hypothesis.
I'm also open to the idea that they were trying a pre-pooler like saber, but they really didn't have the manufacturing technology for that. It could have still been a possible prototype.
SR-71 was a research aircraft as well. They did all sorts of things they never told us about.
*Informative. Thank you.*
The SR-71 is so Chad. 🐿
Excellent 👌
Great video on the greatest aircraft ever!
What a lot of old grade school Story-telling. Have a nice day.
Я учился в московском авиационном институте, знакомый с детства с технической эстетикой радио-, навигационного-, локационного.. и прочего оборудования. Высочайшая школа! При этом мог её сравнивать её с немецкой, британской и русской школами.. Очень жаль, что прогресс технологии уничтожил эту романтику повсеместно. Храню коллекцию деталей той эпохи, но никто уже этого не понимает! И даже не знает запаха Шеллака и Лигроина в приборах...😢
Y'know, sometimes I dislike when ads for merch are inserted into a vid in a slick/sneaky manner- like 'Oh... Wait a sec?!! ...How long have I been watching an ad?!', etc. (/spectrum)... The foregoing is only an attempt at some constructive criticism, though I do have a B.S. degree (well, it's a B.A, but, y'know!)
...That said, it is definitely a classy... chronometer! (Lol, my grandfather, a career naval aviator- NOT a 'pilot'- an aviator... He always corrected me when I asked about his 'watch')
Good vid, as usual, too! Cheers!
Great airplane!
Beautiful piece of work!
Muy buen trabajo este video, enhorabuena
I was a cartographer working for the Defense Mapping Agency in St Louis when the Egyptians and other Arab countries surprised the Israeli in the Yom Kippur War in 1973. After the Israeli regained their footing and fought their way across the Sinai, they crossed the Suez Canal and were occupying Egypt proper when there was a ceasefire. The Defense Mapping Agency was charged with bringing all of the maps up-to-date along the canal. The US used SR-71s to take new photos that we used in updating the maps in the area. We worked in 8 hour shifts 24 hours per day until all of the relevant maps were completed.
Excellent
What AI you use for the voice?
Preordered that sick SR-71 watch!
translated from the neural network, the tail number sounds extremely funny😂
but in general, the translation is very high quality
Great visuals to match the stories 🤩👍🏻🇺🇸
When I was working at NASA at Edwards Airforce Base back in the 90's, the SR-71 would be flown quite often on test missions. One of the cool things happened in the control room on every mission it flew, after MAC 2.5 and 100,000 feet all data in the control room would be displayed as "zeros" as the height and speed were all classified, even to this day.
None of those limits are classified. And it could never get to 100k ft or more
@@gr8crash Sorry your wrong. Try googling the SR71 and you will see that speed, height and a few others are still classified to this date. Even some of the pilots of the Sr-71 have said they are not able to speak to the limits of the plane for classified reasons. Did you ever work for NASA? If not, than you have no idea what you are talking about. the plane for testing that was given to NASA was specifically for very high altitude flights above 100,000 feet and was for a classified program that I can't talk about.
@MrLou345 virtually everything you just said is incorrect. Again all of that information is declassified and public and has been for over 2 decades. Pilots are and freely do talk about everything from their time on the aircraft. The ONLY aspects still classified are parts of the ECM/DEF equipment as it's still in use today.
But speeds, altitudes etc it's all public knowledge.
Also I know the person who was in charge of SR71 flight test for NASA while it was there. The aircraft was never specially modified for flights that high as the aircraft couldn't even fly that high.
@@gr8crash The aircraft would need to go faster to even get that high, and even then at that altitude the engine would die no?
@@gr8crash Wait no IIRC the ECM equipment is dec. also, the name is out there along with its performance. IIRC it isn't a full-fledged one like the ones you'll see on an EA-18 or F-4G WW, it's rather simple.
J'en apprend encore, merci !
Lt.Col. Anthony (Tony) Bevacqua (USAF-Retired) is a member of a very exculsive club consisting of pilots who flew both the U-2 and SR-71 operationally. I believe the number is less than twenty. Thank you Lt. Col. (USAF-Retired).
"from 85000ft this camera was able to take a picture of a 6in object from 85000ft" lol
Gracias x contanos 🚀😍
The F-14 did M2.6+ and was lot less fussy. It served in interceptor, fighter, bomber, and reconnaissance rolls. It’s still the coolest military plane ever.
I wouldn't call those "freak" accidents when those aircraft were pushing the laws of physics to the breaking point every second they were flying. I'm surprised any survived.