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

Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

thesr71blackbird.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 146 posts

Re: Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

#131

Post by vr46 »

noefingway wrote: post #129

Every time the SR-71 pops up, it's brings back a memory of seeing it do a flyby at Dulles Airport. IIRC it was supposed to be the last flight as the program was ending. This is probably 1989. I didn't know about it until the day of the event so I didn't have my camera with me. I think my entire engineering department and a bunch from the production floor (about 15-20 of us) went over to the airport to see the bird. B…

Amazing aircraft. Never had the pleasure of seeing it in motion but I paid a special visit to see the one at the Imperial War Museum in Duxford outside London. Bloody brilliant, and I even broke the rules to touch it briefly with my hand to feel what it was like.

Re: Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

#132

Post by CircleSpokes »

4gotunameagain wrote: post #114
CircleSpokes wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because real life isn't a TV show. That isn't how national security agencies work. They don't dump raw intelligence to the public. The US knew it was Libya obviously, and the data released since then has proved that. Hell even the Stasi & the soviets knew it was Libya. Again this isn't a TV show. No country needs permission to react to an attack against them by another state like Libya.

Oh, so your advice is to blindly trust whatever they shovel into the public's mouths ? I totally trust US three letter organisations, and cannot see what could possibly go wrong as they have never shown signs of incompetence and malice in the past. The fact that the stasi thought it was the Libyans could very well mean that it was a very successful false flag operation. This is the problem with the intelligence appar…

>Oh, so your advice is to blindly trust whatever they shovel into the public's mouths ?

Are you being serious? By this time in history Libya had already established a history for terror attacks and targeting civilians. So yeah I wouldn't have any issue believing it.

Just like when the UK blamed Russia for poising people Salisbury with chemical weapons. I believed them because they had intelligence about it & Russia has a history with this type of attack. Just like Libya already had a proven history of terror attacks in the 80s.

It is beyond silly to think a false flag bombing (injuring 250+ friendly nationals) is more likely than LIBYA, a know rouge state and user of terrorism, bombing a civilian dance club.

You and others are more than happy to bury your heads in the sand and pretend like the world is a TV show where countries post all their intelligence to twitter or in the paper lol.

Re: Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

#133

Post by sbaiddn »

kingkongjaffa wrote: post #106
sbaiddn wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously they use computers. My point is that Newley, (claims at least) to do his design work on paper. Which, is not that surprising. If you're good enough to have a draughtman digitize your designs for you, you're free to draw what you want on a five by four foot surface and not fiddle with a GUI and a 30?, 40? inch screen. Overnight they print you the latest drawing on the plotter and you're back to you doing you…

His name is Newey BTW. What you're describing is not how engineering is done. There's no overnight printing of the drawings. The 3D CAD models are designed and available in real time, they are used in various CFD and FEA models. The only time drawings are printed out are dimensioned production drawings sent to manufacture the parts. https://fractory.com/engineering-drawing-basics/ There are no digital draftsmen, it's…

Im sure the workflow is complicated, just like you said. Im sure lots of Console licenses and Ansys licenses are being used.

And yet here's Newey drawing on a piece of paper. And he hardly looks like a young chap in the 80s.

Who knows, maybe this photo was for the cameras. Maybe he lies that he draws his cars to throw off the competition. But, for what it's worth he claims in interviews that he draws his cars in pencil.

https://www.racetechmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Scree...

Re: Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

#134

Post by mattygee »

vr46 wrote: post #131
noefingway wrote: post #129

Every time the SR-71 pops up, it's brings back a memory of seeing it do a flyby at Dulles Airport. IIRC it was supposed to be the last flight as the program was ending. This is probably 1989. I didn't know about it until the day of the event so I didn't have my camera with me. I think my entire engineering department and a bunch from the production floor (about 15-20 of us) went over to the airport to see the bird. B…

Amazing aircraft. Never had the pleasure of seeing it in motion but I paid a special visit to see the one at the Imperial War Museum in Duxford outside London. Bloody brilliant, and I even broke the rules to touch it briefly with my hand to feel what it was like.

You gotta tell me, what did it feel like? :)

It kinda looks, to my eyes at least, like it has a matte finish in photos, so my thinking would be that it would have perhaps an almost shark skin roughness or something? Though you'd imagine surely not given the bit of extra drag when factored over the whole airframe...maybe?

But then again, at those speeds I wonder if there would be a difference or if boundary layer effects take over or something of that nature.

Disclaimer: am obviously not an aerospace engineer :)

Re: Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

#135

Post by oh_sigh »

Iwan-Zotow wrote: post #115
oh_sigh wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Illegally occupied according to who?

mmm... to anyone who could read? I mean, could you say why us troops are in Syrian oil fields stealing oil?

Under the laws of what group is American presence in Syria illegal? Is it American laws? The UN? Syrian laws?

Re: Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

#136

Post by mardifoufs »

CircleSpokes wrote: post #132
4gotunameagain wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, so your advice is to blindly trust whatever they shovel into the public's mouths ? I totally trust US three letter organisations, and cannot see what could possibly go wrong as they have never shown signs of incompetence and malice in the past. The fact that the stasi thought it was the Libyans could very well mean that it was a very successful false flag operation. This is the problem with the intelligence appar…

>Oh, so your advice is to blindly trust whatever they shovel into the public's mouths ? Are you being serious? By this time in history Libya had already established a history for terror attacks and targeting civilians. So yeah I wouldn't have any issue believing it. Just like when the UK blamed Russia for poising people Salisbury with chemical weapons. I believed them because they had intelligence about it & Russia h…

Again I'm not sure why you're ignoring this but it was only the US that came up with that conclusion, and super quickly too. The other european intelligence agencies, including the German one, didn't agree with the libyan connection. But I'm sure the US knows more, and more quickly than everyone else in Europe (which at the time, had a very strong intelligence apparatus since each country was more independent than it is now).

It's especially convenient that the US did not wait for the results of any investigation before launching an attack. This is just pure american chauvinism, where the US can do no wrong as long as we just believe that their intelligence agencies are always right. I guess it works for americans but to the rest of the world, it just doesn't cut it.

Re: Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

#137

Post by slim »

oh_sigh wrote: post #135
Iwan-Zotow wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mmm... to anyone who could read? I mean, could you say why us troops are in Syrian oil fields stealing oil?

Under the laws of what group is American presence in Syria illegal? Is it American laws? The UN? Syrian laws?

the un

Re: Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

#138

Post by Rebelgecko »

mardifoufs wrote: post #128
rocket_surgeron wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SR-71s were over Libya in 1986 because the Libyan secret service detonated a bomb in a Berlin nightclub, killing 3 and wounding hundreds, ten days prior. "oh yeah well what abou.." With all due respect, stop.

Ah yes, the US said so. You should probably look into the actual investigations and events before telling other people to stop. Almost no european country agrees with the conclusion of the US government (that bombed libya in a matter of days, before any investigation started to begin with). A government that was back then almost frothing at the mouth at any occasion to blame everything on the libyans, to a comical de…

I mean, Germany said so too and the bombing happened in their country. They even convinced other European countries to extradite the suspects who were later convicted

Re: Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

#140

Post by ithkuil »

bombcar wrote: post #124
ithkuil wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. That said, w.r.t old buildings, selection bias may play a significant role, perhaps bigger than intentions

And maintenance costs, too. You may have a bridge that's 100 years old but you're paying 1/10 a new bridge in maintenance every year - not noticeable.

There are also other factors. Imagine you gave a 500yo bridge that is low maintenance and has stood the test of time and all those nice things, but you can't carry the weight of modern vehicles, or if it's not wide enough for modern vehicles etc etc

One of the many tradeoffs in design is how much do you want to spend in preparing for anticipated future demands.

Striking example in my home town of Zagreb. Communist city planners at the time designed new neighbourhood with plenty of parking space because one day productivity advancements will give every family a car to own and they need to have a place to park it!

A few decades later you couldnt find a parking space anywhere because every family had two or three cars!

Post reply on HN