Untitled

23 Oct 2016 admin In G+ Posts

Comments: 43

  1. XB-70 would have been one heck of a bomber

  2. RONALD CRABTREE 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    IT WOULD BE A GREAT TARGET

  3. At Mach 3, not an easy one.

  4. Danny Quizon 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    Boeing also designed a civilian SST airliner based on the XB-70's airframe.

  5. Que bonita aeronave

  6. Oliver Mayo 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    Can you believe this thing had 6 engines and would fly all the way to Russia and back at mach 3.

  7. Oliver Mayo 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    +Christopher Phirman No shooting it down would be alarmingly easy, SAMs of it vintage could travel faster than mach 3 and altitude offered not safety either.

    An aircraft at altitude going mach 3 cant exactly change direction and evade missiles suddenly either.

  8. EAGLE THRUST 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    A scraped dream amagine how much $ was poured into this project.

  9. Oliver Mayo 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    +EAGLE THRUST The US department have shoved thousands of dollars into projects that were never deployed for any length of time though. Commanche helicopter. Sargeant York AAA system, skybolt standoff nuclear weapon…. you name it.

  10. +Oliver Mayo that is true. It did scare Moscow into developing newer SAM and interceptors though. The one thing that would have been interesting to see is the F-108 rapier but that would have been a carry over of the century series.

  11. David Hallyburton 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    +Oliver Mayo I do not agree, "shooting it down being easy". Tell me then …why no SR-71 was ever lost due to enemy fire?

  12. John W 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    Our missile defense system can hit a balistic missile going something like 14,000 Mph. Why couldn't the jet be a target??

  13. David Hallyburton 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    +John W where did you hear that?

  14. John W 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    I was talking about Thad, am I mistaken?

  15. John W 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    Basically, I heard it about Thad, they say when a balistic missile changes trajectory towards earth it will fire a missile to intercep it.

  16. John W 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    No SR-71 has been shot down probably because it was flown before some of the advanced radar technology has been designed.

  17. Reo Cruz 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    Badassery with wings

  18. Timothy X. Foss 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    woaaaa

  19. Yes that's a predictable path. A jet isn't predictable. The Thad system goes to a point where the war head is going to be

  20. David Cheng 23 Oct 2016 Reply

    👍

  21. Oliver Mayo 24 Oct 2016 Reply

    Speed and altitude limits of SA 2 guideline and SA 4 Ganef are enough to shoot down SR71 and XB70 easily.

    A jet moving at mach 3 cant do radical changes in pitch or yaw- it will destroy itself.

  22. SA-2 may have been able to hit them, but tell me why so many SA-2 have been fired at SR-71 and they failed to come close

  23. yes pitch and yaw is one way to fool a missile. But the SR used another technique that worked extremely well. They would fly into enemy air space with plenty of thrust left to accelerate. If a missile was shot at them, they would simply increase to full power, the sudden increase of several hundred miles an hour left the missile confused.

  24. Oliver Mayo 25 Oct 2016 Reply

    +Christopher Phirman​ Dude the aircraft cant accelerate fast enough the engagement distances were over miles. An aircraft at atltitude and high speed cant dodge and sticks out on radar like a huge unmistakeable target. You have to remember that the Guideline was command controlled and guided by a huge static radar. You cant fool a weapon of that kind. It will fly toward whatever it is directed at.

    Why is the SR 71 no longer used? Why do all penetration raids into defended airspace now use very low level attacks?

    Speed is not enough to protect aircraft it never had been. Nor is altitude. Ask Gary Powers.

  25. Oliver Mayo 25 Oct 2016 Reply

    +John Whiteman Rubbish radar technology was mature before the SR71 came along.

  26. Oliver Mayo 25 Oct 2016 Reply

    Weapons like RIM 66, Sprint ABM and THAAD all meet or exceed speed, altitude and range parameters to intercept something at altitude going mach 3.

    Hitting an incoming MIRV which is moving at up to mach 25 on its terminal phase is entirely a different matter.

  27. Jim Douglas 3 Nov 2016 Reply

    lke

  28. Maroyd Lloyd Daim 11 Nov 2016 Reply

    👉PROTON SAGA 👌⌚🌇🌃😃

  29. Brian Lemcke 14 Nov 2016 Reply

    XB-70

  30. Ernest Parker 14 Dec 2016 Reply

    Imagine trump having all this

  31. Ken Black 14 Feb 2017 Reply

    SA2's were handled just fine, there is a LOT more to it and our electronics worked very well. The SA4 also had it's weaknesses, and we could exploit those. Not going into any details about it. But SA2's had real problems shooting down B52s in Vietnam too, so they go to start shotgunning them and hoping for hits. The B70 was cancelled by Kennedy as he said that missiles instead of Bombers made aircraft obsolete. The technologies learned from that aircraft helped us on so many others for years. It did cause the Soviets to start building the Mig 25 Foxbat to intercept it, and it was a paper tiger and they built so many of them. They tried to use it and others to intercept SR71s without success. I wish you all could have attended my boneyard tours in Arizona, there is a lot I could say about certain things there, and some I couldn't, but there was a lot of history given. The SA2 and 4 weren't real issues for us at that time for several reasons but I can't list them here. Newer missiles systems would be an issue, the SA10s and 12s.

  32. Maroyd Lloyd Daim 15 Feb 2017 Reply

    👉Watch 🚗 Battle, ⌚✌👌😍😃😁🌇💿

Leave a Comment!

Your email address will not be published.