Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

theaviationgeekclub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 141 posts

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#101

Post by mannykannot »

mmaunder wrote: post #9

Stick and Rudder is the best read out there if you want an intuitive pilots understanding of what happened here. It unpacks angle of attack from a pilots perspective rather than using engineer speak. At that speed the control surfaces of the Blackbird would have had very little effect which is incredibly scary as you’re approaching a stall low and slow. They’d need big deflections to keep her straight and it would ha…

Plus if the engines do not respond at the same rate, you have asymmetric thrust leading to a yaw if not corrected - and I assume the rudders are not particularly effective at low speed, especially if the engine nacelles, at high angle of attack, are partially blanking them with turbulence. Stall + yaw = spin as a general rule.

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#102

Post by Diesel555 »

yellow_postit wrote: post #66
fnord77 wrote: post #50

I find these stories hard to believe. An expensive top secret spy plane that is hard to fly, requires boatloads of fuel and maintenance allowed to make a detour for a joy ride flyby?

Turns out pilots and the whole chain is still full of humans who at times like “cool” stuff.

This is true. You also can't discount advocating for your product. If you want funding you have to show it off at times. Per the original argument the demonstration teams wouldn't exist. They serve no military purpose if you forget about recruiting and promotion.

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#103

Post by throwaway0a5e »

FearlessNebula wrote: post #69
mmaunder wrote: post #9

Stick and Rudder is the best read out there if you want an intuitive pilots understanding of what happened here. It unpacks angle of attack from a pilots perspective rather than using engineer speak. At that speed the control surfaces of the Blackbird would have had very little effect which is incredibly scary as you’re approaching a stall low and slow. They’d need big deflections to keep her straight and it would ha…

Wouldn’t a well trained pilot (like somebody learning on the SR71) be very familiar with what a slow airplane feels like? I’m shocked that a skilled pilot would have allowed that plane to get so dangerously slow.

You don't get a lot of practice at the limit of the flight envelope in an SR71 for the same reasons crane operators don't do a ton of heavy picks in high winds. It's not worth the risk to the equipment.

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#104

Post by ocdtrekkie »

FearlessNebula wrote: post #71
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #42

So I've heard other great stories from this book before, and I was curious how much it cost to actually get the book. The book in it's latest incarnation is $295. What on earth?

It’s out of print so 3rd party sellers put it up for a ton of money on Amazon

Well, there's that, I see Amazon listings up near $500. But the official website for the book leads to a fresh and current commemorative printing that... rather than opening the book up to the masses again, is $300 a book.

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#105

Post by fosk »

heyitsguay wrote: post #40
serf wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you know how some people have a talent for story-telling, painting vivid landscapes and heroic deeds with words and prose? you have a talent for story-telling, but sort of from the opposite end of the spectrum; you sucked all of the heroism and bravado out of the story without actually misrepresenting any of the facets of it. nice work.

Not to denigrate OP, but this reduced version has become a bit of a copypasta meme of its own.

Essentially it’s like JPEG pictures: the quality degrades the more times it’s being shared.

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#106

Post by quickthrower2 »

yutyut wrote: post #96
sdoering wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Do you have more? Would love to hear.

A few aviation idioms that come to mind. 1. "Stay ahead of the aircraft." i.e. anticipate and manage administrative (or tactical) minutiae to put yourself in the best possible position when the tempo increases. 2. "Aviate, aviate, aviate...then navigate and communicate" (already mentioned). This is commonly used during a crew brief prior to a flight, particularly when discussing emergency procedures. Focus on the mos…

Get-there-itis can adversely affect code quality too!

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#107

Post by chasd00 »

rossjudson wrote: post #59

You can read anything you want about the SR-71, but nothing compares to actually seeing it in person. It is my single favorite engineered object. It's in the Dulles Air and Space museum. Go see it, if you can. You won't regret it.

I saw the one in Tucson Arizona. It’s not as long as I thought it would be. Incredible machine.

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#108

Post by chasd00 »

samstave wrote: post #48

A while back the SR71 ops (flight?) manual was posted to HN... There was a particular comment which I think was on like page 69 or so... "Do not attempt any turns above 70,000 feet; drop to 70,000 feet first then do your turn with a turn radi of ~2miles.... Do not fly above 90,000 feet without prior authorization" --- Or some-such... so the thing was known to fly over 90K feet - but you needed approval to do so... Ni…

They did crazy shit in those days. I saw a mock-up of the lunar lander once. I wouldn’t have ridden in that thing to the end of my street but those guys strapped in and went to the moon!

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#109

Post by lostlogin »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #103
FearlessNebula wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t a well trained pilot (like somebody learning on the SR71) be very familiar with what a slow airplane feels like? I’m shocked that a skilled pilot would have allowed that plane to get so dangerously slow.

You don't get a lot of practice at the limit of the flight envelope in an SR71 for the same reasons crane operators don't do a ton of heavy picks in high winds. It's not worth the risk to the equipment.

> It's not worth the risk to the equipment.

… or life.

Re: The slowest SR-71 Blackbird fly-by

#110

Post by jshier »

GekkePrutser wrote: post #85
FearlessNebula wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t a well trained pilot (like somebody learning on the SR71) be very familiar with what a slow airplane feels like? I’m shocked that a skilled pilot would have allowed that plane to get so dangerously slow.

Yeah it sounds like a tall tale. "Falling at a slight bank" sounds like ideal conditions for onset of a spin. Which a pilot would be very wary of when close to the ground because it means certain death. Also, would it be possible to fly level at such a speed in an SR71? And isn't there a HUD and vertical speed warner? On the other hand their expectation of being grounded sounds pretty accurate :) Oh well I never flew…

The human mind, even one highly trained, is capable of ignoring all sorts of inputs when conditions don't match expectations. For an SR-71 pilot I can easily imagine flying low and slow could create such an issue. It's scary in general just how many airline crashes are "controlled flight into terrain". In 2009, Air France flight 447 crashed off the coast of Brazil after the pilots flew it at a stall from 35,000 feet.

https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/?p=8a7678c37982

Post reply on HN