12 ms·

Mach 3.5 Over Libya in an SR-71 Blackbird

194 points by ilamont 4y ago

scrlk 4y ago
It's a shame that the book that this story came from - Sled Driver by Brian Shul - is out of print. The SR-71 speed check story is another good read: https://www.thesr71blackbird.com/Aircraft/Stories/sr-71-blackbird-speed-check-story https://www.thesr71blackbird.com/Aircraft/Stories/sr-71-blac...
- brightball 4y ago
  Still worth it to get Skunk Works by Ben Rich. One of the best books I've ever read.
  - wslh 4y ago
    Thanks, learning... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skunk_Works https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skunk_Works
  - geocrasher 4y ago
    Yep, a fantastic read.
- kayodelycaon 4y ago
  I'm going to avoid linking to the reddit post, but if you google around a bit, you can find a pdf that fell off the back of a truck.
- ubermonkey 4y ago
  I have read that story SO MANY TIMES, but I nearly always click and read again when it comes up.
  - scrlk 4y ago
    Once you've finished re-reading, here's the reverse version: > There were a lot of things we couldn't do in a Cessna 172, but we were some of the slowest guys on the block and loved reminding our fellow aviators of this fact. People often asked us if, because of this fact, it was fun to fly the 172. Fun would not be the first word I would use to describe flying this plane. Mundane, maybe. Even boring at times. But there was one day in our Cessna experience when we would have to say that it was pure fun to be some of the slowest guys out there, at least for a moment. > It occurred when my CFI and I were flying a training flight. We needed 40 hours in the plane to complete my training and attain PPL status. Somewhere over Colorado we had passed the 40 hour mark. We had made the turn back towards our home airport in a radius of a mile or two and the plane was performing flawlessly. My gauges were wired in the left seat and we were starting to feel pretty good about ourselves, not only because I would soon be flying as a true pilot, but because we had gained a great deal of confidence in the plane in the past ten months. Bumbling across the mountains 3,500 feet below us, I could only see about 8 miles across the ground. I was, finally, after many humbling months of training and study, ahead of the plane. > I was beginning to feel a bit sorry for my CFI in the right seat. There he was, with nothing to do except watch me and monitor two different radios. This wasn't really good practice for him at all. He'd been doing it for years. It had been difficult for me to relinquish control of the radios, as during my this part of my flying career, I could handle it on my own. But it was part of the division of duties on this flight and I had adjusted to it. I still insisted on talking on the radio while we were on the ground, however. My CFI was so good at many things, but he couldn't match my expertise at sounding awkward on the radios, a skill that had been roughly sharpened with years of listening to LiveATC.com where the slightest radio miscue was a daily occurrence. He understood that and allowed me that luxury. > Just to get a sense of what my CFI had to contend with, I pulled the radio toggle switches and monitored the frequencies along with him. The predominant radio chatter was from Denver Center, not far below us, controlling daily traffic in our sector. While they had us on their scope (for a good while, I might add), we were in uncontrolled airspace and normally would not talk to them unless we needed to climb into their airspace. We listened as the shaky voice of a lone SR-71 pilot asked Center for a readout of his ground speed. Center replied: "Aspen 20, I show you at one thousand eight hundred and forty-two knots, across the ground." Now the thing to understand about Center controllers, was that whether they were talking to a rookie pilot in a Cessna, or to Air Force One, they always spoke in the exact same, calm, deep, professional, tone that made one feel important. I referred to it as the "Houston Center voice." I have always felt that after years of seeing documentaries on this country's space program and listening to the calm and distinct voice of the Houston controllers, that all other controllers since then wanted to sound like that, and that they basically did. And it didn't matter what sector of the country we would be flying in, it always seemed like the same guy was talking. Over the years that tone of voice had become somewhat of a comforting sound to pilots everywhere. Conversely, over the years, pilots always wanted to ensure that, when transmitting, they sounded like Chuck Yeager, or at least like John Wayne. Better to die than sound bad on the radios. > Just moments after the SR-71's inquiry, an F-18 piped up on frequency, in a rather superior tone, asking for his ground speed. "Dusty 52, Center, we have you at 620 on the ground." Boy, I thought, the F-18 really must think he is dazzling his SR-71 brethren. Then out of the blue, a Twin Beech pilot out of an airport outside of Denver came up on frequency. You knew right away it was a Twin Beech driver because he sounded very cool on the radios. "Center, Beechcraft 173-Delta-Charlie ground speed check". Before Center could reply, I'm thinking to myself, hey, that Beech probably has a ground speed indicator in that multi-thousand-dollar cockpit, so why is he asking Center for a readout? Then I got it, ol' Delta-Charlie here is making sure that every military jock from Mount Whitney to the Mojave knows what true speed is. He's the slowest dude in the valley today, and he just wants everyone to know how much fun he is having in his new bug-smasher. And the reply, always with that same, calm, voice, with more distinct alliteration than emotion: "173-Delta-Charlie, Center, we have you at 90 knots on the ground." And I thought to myself, is this a ripe situation, or what? As my hand instinctively reached for the mic button, I had to remind myself that my CFI was in control of the radios. Still, I thought, it must be done - in mere hours we'll be out of the sector and the opportunity will be lost. That Beechcraft must die, and die now. I thought about all of my training and how important it was that we developed well as a crew and knew that to jump in on the radios now would destroy the integrity of all that we had worked toward becoming. I was torn. > Somewhere, half a mile above Colorado, there was a pilot screaming inside his head. Then, I heard it. The click of the mic button from the right seat. That was the very moment that I knew my CFI and I had become lifelong friends. Very professionally, and with no emotion, my CFI spoke: "Denver Center, Cessna 56-November-Sierra, can you give us a ground speed check?" There was no hesitation, and the replay came as if was an everyday request. "Cessna 56-November-Sierra, I show you at 56 knots, across the ground." > I think it was the six knots that I liked the best, so accurate and proud was Center to deliver that information without hesitation, and you just knew he was smiling. But the precise point at which I knew that my CFI and I were going to be really good friends for a long time was when he keyed the mic once again to say, in his most CFI-like voice: "Ah, Center, much thanks, we're showing closer to 52 on the money." > For a moment my CFI was a god. And we finally heard a little crack in the armor of the Houston Center voice, when Denver came back with, "Roger that November-Sierra, your E6B is probably more accurate than our state-of-the-art radar. You boys have a good one." It all had lasted for just moments, but in that short, memorable stroll across the west, the Navy had been owned, all mortal airplanes on freq were forced to bow before the King of Slow, and more importantly, my CFI and I had crossed the threshold of being BFFs. A fine day's work. We never heard another transmission on that frequency all the way to our home airport. > For just one day, it truly was fun being the slowest guys out there.
- TimMeade 4y ago
  He tells it on stage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AyHH9G9et0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AyHH9G9et0
- stef25 4y ago
  Heh there's a speed check story in this article too with different numbers: For the F-18 Dusty 52 it's 525 vs 620 knots and for the blackbird it's 1742 vs 1842.
- dboreham 4y ago
  > is out of print I bought a copy sometime in the 90s, found in the remaindered section of a bookstore, cheap. Fast forward a decade or so, a couple of house moves, and I can't find the book. So I order a copy from Amazon, still available new at that time. Another decade or so later, I find my first copy. Then I discover they're worth like $300+ each!
- sampo 4y ago
  You can get a digital copy of the book easily https://www.google.com/search?q=Sled+Driver+pdf https://www.google.com/search?q=Sled+Driver+pdf
  - kayodelycaon 4y ago
    Just a note, the Kindle version isn't available for sale, despite being listed on Google search.
- smburdick 4y ago
  And it looks like they all cost hundreds: https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?kn=Sled%20Driver%20by%20Brian%20Shul&sts=t&cm_sp=SearchF-_-topnav-_-Results&ds=20 https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?kn=Sled%20Dri...
- jlack 4y ago
  He sells his books anytime he gives a talk. I got an autographed copy ~5 years ago when he was a speaker at the museum of flight in Seattle during the seafair airshow.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
phkahler 4y ago
Is Mach 3.5 the highest reported speed? Is it "official" in some way?
- brightball 4y ago
  I believe it's the upper limit to the SR-71's engine style based on air intake. If you watched Top Gun: Maverick since it came out they (spoiler) had him flying a prototype plane called the Darkstar to hit Mach 10 in order to maintain a military contract. During the flight, he switches engines to SCRAM Jet once he reaches Mach 3.5 because in order for those types of engines to have enough air intake to function, you already have to be traveling at that speed. This was such an innovation that China redirected a satellite to find the plane because they thought it was real. If you've never read Skunk Works by Ben Rich, I highly recommend it. Lots of SR-71 stories along with U-2, F-117 too.
  - andrewflnr 4y ago
    I doubt they were absolutely convinced it was real, but still pretty hilarious. https://www.businessinsider.com/bruckheimer-china-moved-satellite-to-see-top-gun-hypersonic-aircraft-2022-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/bruckheimer-china-moved-sate...
    - greggsy 4y ago
      “The Navy told us that a Chinese satellite turned and headed on a different route to photograph that plane.” I can only assume that China publish their targeting on some Twitter account? What ludicrous statement.
      - brightball 4y ago
        I don't think the Navy was watching Chinese twitter...
        greggsy 4y ago
mardifoufs 4y ago
I love stories about America violating sovreign airspace, especially when they use such a cool plane. The entire world is truly their own backyard!
- igravious 4y ago
  The days of America violating sovereign airspace are drawing to a close, thankfully. “The United States-initiated aerial bombing of targets inside the borders of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriyah which took place on April 15, 1986, was met with substantial and immediate criticism by the world community. The positive reaction from the U.S. congress and the American public was not shared by much of the world. Arab nations denounced the American action, as did the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. In meetings of the UN Security Council, countries denouncing the raid outnumbered those which supported it. Good article: “American Bombing of Libya: An International Legal Analysis” (1987) https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1722&context=jil https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?ar...
  - closewith 4y ago
    > The days of America violating sovereign airspace are drawing to a close, thankfully. They're still overflying Afghanistan and who knows where else.
  - arcanemachiner 4y ago
    I wouldn't hold my breath... The US launched an airstrike in an illegally-occupied (Syria) nation less than a week ago. https://news.antiwar.com/2023/03/25/us-carries-out-airstrikes-in-syria-multiple-american-bases-attacked/ https://news.antiwar.com/2023/03/25/us-carries-out-airstrike...
    - oh_sigh 4y ago
      Illegally occupied according to who?
      - 4y ago
JustSomeNobody 4y ago
Amazing what engineers were able to do (build aircraft like the SR-71) before computers came along and made them less productive.
- dboreham 4y ago
  That said, it did require computers retrofitted to the engines to make the plane safe. http://www.enginehistory.org/Convention/2014/SR-71Inlts/SR-71Inlts.shtml#:~:text=A%20computer%20control%20system%20is%20employed%20in%20the%20SR%2D71%20to%20position%20the%20bypass%20doors%20and%20maintain%20an%20inlet%20flowing%20normally%20at%20high%20performance http://www.enginehistory.org/Convention/2014/SR-71Inlts/SR-7....
  - HPsquared 4y ago
    That task could have probably been done by a mechanical or analogue computer. Not sure I'd call that control system a full-fledged computer.
    - kens 4y ago
      Aerospace computers don't get any respect. The SR-71's DAFICS (Digital Automatic Flight and Inlet Control System) is a digital computer system with triple-redundancy. I bet your computer doesn't have that :-) https://doi.org/10.4271/851977 https://doi.org/10.4271/851977
- MR4D 4y ago
  Short of God, an engineer with a slide rule is the most powerful thing in the universe.
- ye-olde-sysrq 4y ago
  I know you're being glib but I assume the reason we didn't do any more Blackbirds is because normal satellite imagery got good enough that it didn't make as much sense to keep building these crazy things. Does anyone remember that satellite photo Trump leaked of that iranian missile silo? https://www.npr.org/2019/08/30/755994591/president-trump-tweets-sensitive-surveillance-image-of-iran https://www.npr.org/2019/08/30/755994591/president-trump-twe... This one ^ I'm just guessing that if they showed it to Trump unprompted in a briefing, it's unlikely that this is max zoom. And it's already crazy clear. And the article mentions: "Hanham also says that the European company Airbus has been experimenting with drones that fly so high, they are technically outside the atmosphere and thus operating outside national boundaries. But she says she doesn't know whether the U.S. has such a system." So I think we just got a bit better at radar deflection and flying really high to where the Blackbird doesn't make sense anymore.
geocrasher 4y ago
Indeed, Mach 3.5 is the declared top speed in this story, but higher speeds are implied. The Mach eases to 3.5 as we crest 80,000 feet... Screaming past Tripoli, our phenomenal speed continues to rise... I realize that I still have my left hand full-forward and we're continuing to rocket along in maximum afterburner... The TDI now shows us Mach numbers, not only new to our experience but flat out scary. He mentions unusually cool temperatures allowing higher speeds than usual, and the aircraft is performing better than ever. So who knows. 3.6? Did a perfect set of circumstances, mixed with a rather urgent need to depart, take them closer to 3.7? It's truly incredible that the A12/SR-71 aircraft was designed without the benefit of modern computing. In Ben Rich's book "Skunk Works" I recall there a bit about a comment that somebody once made regarding Kelly Johnson, something like "That Swede can see air". Truly a compliment to Johnson's almost uncanny ability to design aircraft for a specification. The U2 was another example of such ability.
- dghughes 4y ago
  Also incredible most of the titanium came from the USSR but through indirect routes and suppliers with the Soviets being unaware.
  - ben7799 4y ago
    Which is really odd, as Titanium is not that rare. Are we sure that story about the Titanium coming from the USSR is accurate?
    - throwmeaway1212 4y ago
      It's a fairly well known and documented story, do you have anything similar in evidence rather than just conjecture?
      - pc86 4y ago
        [flagged]
    - 4y ago
vlovich123 4y ago
The dates in the story are confusing me. > My first encounter with the SR-71 came when I was 10 years old in the form of molded black plastic in a Revell kit. > Twenty-nine years later, I stood awe-struck in a Beale Air Force Base hangar, staring at the very real SR-71 before me. > In 1962, the first Blackbird successfully flew, and in 1966, the same year I graduated from high school, the Air Force began flying operational SR-71 missions. > I came to the program in 1983 So the author was born in 1944 if they were 39 (29+ 10) in 1983. 1966 then puts them graduating at 22 (was high school longer back then? I wouldn’t have thought so and he’s supposed to have a stellar record and 22 feels a little old for joining the military) and playing with the SR-71 model in 1952 before it was even conceived in 1960. What am I missing?
- cfeduke 4y ago
  My thinking is high school graduation could be as early as 16 but more likely 17 or 18, so 1966 - 18 = 1948 (or 49 or 50). 1983 would be 35, though by the author's own math he'd be 39. I think its probably safe to discount "10 years old" memory for the Revell kit; I can't seem to find when the kit began production (because the Internet is about buying things) - but in order for high school graduation to be at age 18 then the kit would have to be produced and sold in 1958 which seems unlikely (or 1960 if graduating at age 16).
  - vlovich123 4y ago
    I’m not familiar with this space. Is a Revell kit for a top secret plane that hadn’t even been designed something that happened/happens commonly? The author says the motivating incident was the U2 shoot down in 1960 which was the motivating incident for the engineer to start designing it. How would the author be playing with it then? Misdirect about the kid part to enhance the story? Maybe they had the kit later in life and retrofitted it into a “destiny” theme?
- ben7799 4y ago
  A bunch of this doesn't make much sense to me either, the SR-71 was revealed to the public in 1966. That would make him born in 1956. He would be 30 in 1986, which makes sense, but the the 29 years later part doesn't sound right. I built an SR-71 kit as a kid. But I was born in 1977. I wish I still had it. I put a ton of work into it. The model manufacturers did scoop the reveals at some points, but they were never that accurate. I had an "F-19 Stealth Fighter" kit I built as well. It had significant differences from the F-117 when that became public.
ilamont 4y ago
Ironically, the plane was dripping, much like the misshapen model had assembled in my youth. Fuel was seeping through the joints, raining down on the hangar floor. At Mach 3, the plane would expand several inches because of the severe temperature, which could heat the leading edge of the wing to 1,100 degrees. To prevent cracking, expansion joints had been built into the plane. Sealant resembling rubber glue covered the seams, but when the plane was subsonic, fuel would leak through the joints. Wouldn't this be a major hazard on the ground?
- brianwawok 4y ago
  You do what you gotta do. Spending millions per flight, you can have some guys in a golf cart with kitty litter follow the plane around the hanger.
- icegreentea2 4y ago
  Yes. But also the fuel used was also very difficult to light (consequence of it's design requirements), so at least as a fire hazard, it was probably relatively well controlled. Uh health risks... shrug. The pilot is wearing most of a space suit. Who knows whats up with the ground crew though.
- saganus 4y ago
  In the "Skunk Works" book they explain that you could throw a lit cigarette directly into a puddle of fuel and it would not ignite, due to the very high temps needed.
  - 93po 4y ago
    Cigarettes also won't ignite regular car gas
    - pc86 4y ago
      Yes but for a different reason - car gas because it's the vapors which ignite, so if you toss a cigarette on a fresh puddle of car gas you're going to have a very bad day. For planes it's due to the much higher temperatures required, the worst thing you'll do tossing a cigarette into a fresh puddle of jet fuel is burn your finger.
FpUser 4y ago
Kelly was an absolutely amazing person. A giant.
carbl 4y ago
No mention of the big block GM V8s on a wagon that was used as a crank to start the engines. They went through a couple of units.
anonymousiam 4y ago
Some interesting trivia: The SR-71 began as the YF-12, and was originally supposed to be RS-71 (Reconnaissance/Surveillance), but somebody thought SR sounded better. The YF prefix on the original aircraft is often referred to as "Yankee Fire", a caveat that is still in use.
- swasheck 4y ago
  legend is that president johnson got it confused in a press conference and called it the sr-71 so instead of correcting him they just changed the name. "skunk works" is a great read. i'm almost done with "area 51" by annie jacobsen and it's quite the interesting read as well, though it does get dry at times. https://openlibrary.org/works/OL15839422W/Area_51 https://openlibrary.org/works/OL15839422W/Area_51
  - chipsa 4y ago
    The correct part of the legend is that the speech he was reading off of said SR-71, because someone thought it sounded better, and getting it spoken by the President was easier than doing it the "Right" way.
    - swasheck 4y ago
      thank you. i really appreciate that clarification. it's always nice to learn new things.
- laverya 4y ago
  Pretty sure that the CIA's A-12s came before the YF-12 interceptor prototype.
Synaesthesia 4y ago
I guess it was pretty incredible watching a missile fly down an air vent, pretty unbelievable, but couldn’t we feasibly use that same technology to shoot food to hungry people? You know what I mean? Fly over the Ethiopia: “There’s a guy that needs a banana!” Stealth banana. Smart fruit!
- knodi123 4y ago
  This is a quote from a Bill Hicks standup routine. https://youtu.be/1o_8b31GRnU?t=49 https://youtu.be/1o_8b31GRnU?t=49
mongol 4y ago
I remember my manager was obsessed with the plane and it's name. It sounded so cool. But then I told him what bird it really is (Koltrast in Swedish) and he seemed so disappointed. He probably thought it was a black Eagle or something. Here the Blackbird is mostly known för its beautiful although melancholic song. And it is also the national bird of Sweden.
noefingway 4y ago
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. Back then you could drive up to and park at the upper departure level. So there we are, waiting... Someone brought a portable scanner along and was listening to air traffic control, so we knew when it would pass over. First thing we heard was the sonic boom as it passed over (I believe this flight set the west coast to east coast speed record.) After some interval of minutes we heard which direction it would be coming from. All other landing and take off traffic was suspended while the bird circled the airport. Then turned a made a low level (like about the height of the tower) really slow. We got a really good look at it. He hit the afterburners, and took off. I've never seen anything move that fast. It practically disappeared, like something out of a movie jumping into hyperspace. Absolutely incredible, no matter how much I read about the SR-71 and the program, I'm just in awe of the designers and engineers that made it happen.
- vr46 4y ago
  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.
  - mattygee 4y ago
    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 :)
calmoo 4y ago
If anyone has a vague interest in this airplane - I would highly reccommend seeing it in the flesh, it is probably the most incredible piece of machinery I have seen. I have seen two different ones, one in the Seattle flight museum, and another in a flight museum in Riverside, CA.
simonebrunozzi 4y ago
> The Blackbird had outrun nearly 4,000 missiles, not once taking a scratch from enemy fire. Truly amazing.

194 points by ilamont 4y ago

It's a shame that the book that this story came from - Sled Driver by Brian Shul - is out of print. The SR-71 speed check story is another good read: https://www.thesr71blackbird.com/Aircraft/Stories/sr-71-blackbird-speed-check-story https://www.thesr71blackbird.com/Aircraft/Stories/sr-71-blac...

brightball 4y ago
Still worth it to get Skunk Works by Ben Rich. One of the best books I've ever read.
- wslh 4y ago
  Thanks, learning... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skunk_Works https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skunk_Works
- geocrasher 4y ago
  Yep, a fantastic read.
kayodelycaon 4y ago
I'm going to avoid linking to the reddit post, but if you google around a bit, you can find a pdf that fell off the back of a truck.
ubermonkey 4y ago
I have read that story SO MANY TIMES, but I nearly always click and read again when it comes up.
- scrlk 4y ago
  Once you've finished re-reading, here's the reverse version: > There were a lot of things we couldn't do in a Cessna 172, but we were some of the slowest guys on the block and loved reminding our fellow aviators of this fact. People often asked us if, because of this fact, it was fun to fly the 172. Fun would not be the first word I would use to describe flying this plane. Mundane, maybe. Even boring at times. But there was one day in our Cessna experience when we would have to say that it was pure fun to be some of the slowest guys out there, at least for a moment. > It occurred when my CFI and I were flying a training flight. We needed 40 hours in the plane to complete my training and attain PPL status. Somewhere over Colorado we had passed the 40 hour mark. We had made the turn back towards our home airport in a radius of a mile or two and the plane was performing flawlessly. My gauges were wired in the left seat and we were starting to feel pretty good about ourselves, not only because I would soon be flying as a true pilot, but because we had gained a great deal of confidence in the plane in the past ten months. Bumbling across the mountains 3,500 feet below us, I could only see about 8 miles across the ground. I was, finally, after many humbling months of training and study, ahead of the plane. > I was beginning to feel a bit sorry for my CFI in the right seat. There he was, with nothing to do except watch me and monitor two different radios. This wasn't really good practice for him at all. He'd been doing it for years. It had been difficult for me to relinquish control of the radios, as during my this part of my flying career, I could handle it on my own. But it was part of the division of duties on this flight and I had adjusted to it. I still insisted on talking on the radio while we were on the ground, however. My CFI was so good at many things, but he couldn't match my expertise at sounding awkward on the radios, a skill that had been roughly sharpened with years of listening to LiveATC.com where the slightest radio miscue was a daily occurrence. He understood that and allowed me that luxury. > Just to get a sense of what my CFI had to contend with, I pulled the radio toggle switches and monitored the frequencies along with him. The predominant radio chatter was from Denver Center, not far below us, controlling daily traffic in our sector. While they had us on their scope (for a good while, I might add), we were in uncontrolled airspace and normally would not talk to them unless we needed to climb into their airspace. We listened as the shaky voice of a lone SR-71 pilot asked Center for a readout of his ground speed. Center replied: "Aspen 20, I show you at one thousand eight hundred and forty-two knots, across the ground." Now the thing to understand about Center controllers, was that whether they were talking to a rookie pilot in a Cessna, or to Air Force One, they always spoke in the exact same, calm, deep, professional, tone that made one feel important. I referred to it as the "Houston Center voice." I have always felt that after years of seeing documentaries on this country's space program and listening to the calm and distinct voice of the Houston controllers, that all other controllers since then wanted to sound like that, and that they basically did. And it didn't matter what sector of the country we would be flying in, it always seemed like the same guy was talking. Over the years that tone of voice had become somewhat of a comforting sound to pilots everywhere. Conversely, over the years, pilots always wanted to ensure that, when transmitting, they sounded like Chuck Yeager, or at least like John Wayne. Better to die than sound bad on the radios. > Just moments after the SR-71's inquiry, an F-18 piped up on frequency, in a rather superior tone, asking for his ground speed. "Dusty 52, Center, we have you at 620 on the ground." Boy, I thought, the F-18 really must think he is dazzling his SR-71 brethren. Then out of the blue, a Twin Beech pilot out of an airport outside of Denver came up on frequency. You knew right away it was a Twin Beech driver because he sounded very cool on the radios. "Center, Beechcraft 173-Delta-Charlie ground speed check". Before Center could reply, I'm thinking to myself, hey, that Beech probably has a ground speed indicator in that multi-thousand-dollar cockpit, so why is he asking Center for a readout? Then I got it, ol' Delta-Charlie here is making sure that every military jock from Mount Whitney to the Mojave knows what true speed is. He's the slowest dude in the valley today, and he just wants everyone to know how much fun he is having in his new bug-smasher. And the reply, always with that same, calm, voice, with more distinct alliteration than emotion: "173-Delta-Charlie, Center, we have you at 90 knots on the ground." And I thought to myself, is this a ripe situation, or what? As my hand instinctively reached for the mic button, I had to remind myself that my CFI was in control of the radios. Still, I thought, it must be done - in mere hours we'll be out of the sector and the opportunity will be lost. That Beechcraft must die, and die now. I thought about all of my training and how important it was that we developed well as a crew and knew that to jump in on the radios now would destroy the integrity of all that we had worked toward becoming. I was torn. > Somewhere, half a mile above Colorado, there was a pilot screaming inside his head. Then, I heard it. The click of the mic button from the right seat. That was the very moment that I knew my CFI and I had become lifelong friends. Very professionally, and with no emotion, my CFI spoke: "Denver Center, Cessna 56-November-Sierra, can you give us a ground speed check?" There was no hesitation, and the replay came as if was an everyday request. "Cessna 56-November-Sierra, I show you at 56 knots, across the ground." > I think it was the six knots that I liked the best, so accurate and proud was Center to deliver that information without hesitation, and you just knew he was smiling. But the precise point at which I knew that my CFI and I were going to be really good friends for a long time was when he keyed the mic once again to say, in his most CFI-like voice: "Ah, Center, much thanks, we're showing closer to 52 on the money." > For a moment my CFI was a god. And we finally heard a little crack in the armor of the Houston Center voice, when Denver came back with, "Roger that November-Sierra, your E6B is probably more accurate than our state-of-the-art radar. You boys have a good one." It all had lasted for just moments, but in that short, memorable stroll across the west, the Navy had been owned, all mortal airplanes on freq were forced to bow before the King of Slow, and more importantly, my CFI and I had crossed the threshold of being BFFs. A fine day's work. We never heard another transmission on that frequency all the way to our home airport. > For just one day, it truly was fun being the slowest guys out there.
TimMeade 4y ago
He tells it on stage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AyHH9G9et0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AyHH9G9et0
stef25 4y ago
Heh there's a speed check story in this article too with different numbers: For the F-18 Dusty 52 it's 525 vs 620 knots and for the blackbird it's 1742 vs 1842.
dboreham 4y ago
> is out of print I bought a copy sometime in the 90s, found in the remaindered section of a bookstore, cheap. Fast forward a decade or so, a couple of house moves, and I can't find the book. So I order a copy from Amazon, still available new at that time. Another decade or so later, I find my first copy. Then I discover they're worth like $300+ each!
sampo 4y ago
You can get a digital copy of the book easily https://www.google.com/search?q=Sled+Driver+pdf https://www.google.com/search?q=Sled+Driver+pdf
- kayodelycaon 4y ago
  Just a note, the Kindle version isn't available for sale, despite being listed on Google search.
smburdick 4y ago
And it looks like they all cost hundreds: https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?kn=Sled%20Driver%20by%20Brian%20Shul&sts=t&cm_sp=SearchF-_-topnav-_-Results&ds=20 https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?kn=Sled%20Dri...
jlack 4y ago
He sells his books anytime he gives a talk. I got an autographed copy ~5 years ago when he was a speaker at the museum of flight in Seattle during the seafair airshow.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

phkahler 4y ago

Is Mach 3.5 the highest reported speed? Is it "official" in some way?

brightball 4y ago
I believe it's the upper limit to the SR-71's engine style based on air intake. If you watched Top Gun: Maverick since it came out they (spoiler) had him flying a prototype plane called the Darkstar to hit Mach 10 in order to maintain a military contract. During the flight, he switches engines to SCRAM Jet once he reaches Mach 3.5 because in order for those types of engines to have enough air intake to function, you already have to be traveling at that speed. This was such an innovation that China redirected a satellite to find the plane because they thought it was real. If you've never read Skunk Works by Ben Rich, I highly recommend it. Lots of SR-71 stories along with U-2, F-117 too.
- andrewflnr 4y ago
  I doubt they were absolutely convinced it was real, but still pretty hilarious. https://www.businessinsider.com/bruckheimer-china-moved-satellite-to-see-top-gun-hypersonic-aircraft-2022-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/bruckheimer-china-moved-sate...
  - greggsy 4y ago
    “The Navy told us that a Chinese satellite turned and headed on a different route to photograph that plane.” I can only assume that China publish their targeting on some Twitter account? What ludicrous statement.
    - brightball 4y ago
      I don't think the Navy was watching Chinese twitter...
      - greggsy 4y ago

mardifoufs 4y ago

I love stories about America violating sovreign airspace, especially when they use such a cool plane. The entire world is truly their own backyard!

igravious 4y ago
The days of America violating sovereign airspace are drawing to a close, thankfully. “The United States-initiated aerial bombing of targets inside the borders of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriyah which took place on April 15, 1986, was met with substantial and immediate criticism by the world community. The positive reaction from the U.S. congress and the American public was not shared by much of the world. Arab nations denounced the American action, as did the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. In meetings of the UN Security Council, countries denouncing the raid outnumbered those which supported it. Good article: “American Bombing of Libya: An International Legal Analysis” (1987) https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1722&context=jil https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?ar...
- closewith 4y ago
  > The days of America violating sovereign airspace are drawing to a close, thankfully. They're still overflying Afghanistan and who knows where else.
- arcanemachiner 4y ago
  I wouldn't hold my breath... The US launched an airstrike in an illegally-occupied (Syria) nation less than a week ago. https://news.antiwar.com/2023/03/25/us-carries-out-airstrikes-in-syria-multiple-american-bases-attacked/ https://news.antiwar.com/2023/03/25/us-carries-out-airstrike...
  - oh_sigh 4y ago
    Illegally occupied according to who?
    - 4y ago

JustSomeNobody 4y ago

Amazing what engineers were able to do (build aircraft like the SR-71) before computers came along and made them less productive.

dboreham 4y ago
That said, it did require computers retrofitted to the engines to make the plane safe. http://www.enginehistory.org/Convention/2014/SR-71Inlts/SR-71Inlts.shtml#:~:text=A%20computer%20control%20system%20is%20employed%20in%20the%20SR%2D71%20to%20position%20the%20bypass%20doors%20and%20maintain%20an%20inlet%20flowing%20normally%20at%20high%20performance http://www.enginehistory.org/Convention/2014/SR-71Inlts/SR-7....
- HPsquared 4y ago
  That task could have probably been done by a mechanical or analogue computer. Not sure I'd call that control system a full-fledged computer.
  - kens 4y ago
    Aerospace computers don't get any respect. The SR-71's DAFICS (Digital Automatic Flight and Inlet Control System) is a digital computer system with triple-redundancy. I bet your computer doesn't have that :-) https://doi.org/10.4271/851977 https://doi.org/10.4271/851977
MR4D 4y ago
Short of God, an engineer with a slide rule is the most powerful thing in the universe.
ye-olde-sysrq 4y ago
I know you're being glib but I assume the reason we didn't do any more Blackbirds is because normal satellite imagery got good enough that it didn't make as much sense to keep building these crazy things. Does anyone remember that satellite photo Trump leaked of that iranian missile silo? https://www.npr.org/2019/08/30/755994591/president-trump-tweets-sensitive-surveillance-image-of-iran https://www.npr.org/2019/08/30/755994591/president-trump-twe... This one ^ I'm just guessing that if they showed it to Trump unprompted in a briefing, it's unlikely that this is max zoom. And it's already crazy clear. And the article mentions: "Hanham also says that the European company Airbus has been experimenting with drones that fly so high, they are technically outside the atmosphere and thus operating outside national boundaries. But she says she doesn't know whether the U.S. has such a system." So I think we just got a bit better at radar deflection and flying really high to where the Blackbird doesn't make sense anymore.

geocrasher 4y ago

Indeed, Mach 3.5 is the declared top speed in this story, but higher speeds are implied. The Mach eases to 3.5 as we crest 80,000 feet... Screaming past Tripoli, our phenomenal speed continues to rise... I realize that I still have my left hand full-forward and we're continuing to rocket along in maximum afterburner... The TDI now shows us Mach numbers, not only new to our experience but flat out scary. He mentions unusually cool temperatures allowing higher speeds than usual, and the aircraft is performing better than ever. So who knows. 3.6? Did a perfect set of circumstances, mixed with a rather urgent need to depart, take them closer to 3.7? It's truly incredible that the A12/SR-71 aircraft was designed without the benefit of modern computing. In Ben Rich's book "Skunk Works" I recall there a bit about a comment that somebody once made regarding Kelly Johnson, something like "That Swede can see air". Truly a compliment to Johnson's almost uncanny ability to design aircraft for a specification. The U2 was another example of such ability.

dghughes 4y ago
Also incredible most of the titanium came from the USSR but through indirect routes and suppliers with the Soviets being unaware.
- ben7799 4y ago
  Which is really odd, as Titanium is not that rare. Are we sure that story about the Titanium coming from the USSR is accurate?
  - throwmeaway1212 4y ago
    It's a fairly well known and documented story, do you have anything similar in evidence rather than just conjecture?
    - pc86 4y ago
      [flagged]
  - 4y ago

vlovich123 4y ago

The dates in the story are confusing me. > My first encounter with the SR-71 came when I was 10 years old in the form of molded black plastic in a Revell kit. > Twenty-nine years later, I stood awe-struck in a Beale Air Force Base hangar, staring at the very real SR-71 before me. > In 1962, the first Blackbird successfully flew, and in 1966, the same year I graduated from high school, the Air Force began flying operational SR-71 missions. > I came to the program in 1983 So the author was born in 1944 if they were 39 (29+ 10) in 1983. 1966 then puts them graduating at 22 (was high school longer back then? I wouldn’t have thought so and he’s supposed to have a stellar record and 22 feels a little old for joining the military) and playing with the SR-71 model in 1952 before it was even conceived in 1960. What am I missing?

cfeduke 4y ago
My thinking is high school graduation could be as early as 16 but more likely 17 or 18, so 1966 - 18 = 1948 (or 49 or 50). 1983 would be 35, though by the author's own math he'd be 39. I think its probably safe to discount "10 years old" memory for the Revell kit; I can't seem to find when the kit began production (because the Internet is about buying things) - but in order for high school graduation to be at age 18 then the kit would have to be produced and sold in 1958 which seems unlikely (or 1960 if graduating at age 16).
- vlovich123 4y ago
  I’m not familiar with this space. Is a Revell kit for a top secret plane that hadn’t even been designed something that happened/happens commonly? The author says the motivating incident was the U2 shoot down in 1960 which was the motivating incident for the engineer to start designing it. How would the author be playing with it then? Misdirect about the kid part to enhance the story? Maybe they had the kit later in life and retrofitted it into a “destiny” theme?
ben7799 4y ago
A bunch of this doesn't make much sense to me either, the SR-71 was revealed to the public in 1966. That would make him born in 1956. He would be 30 in 1986, which makes sense, but the the 29 years later part doesn't sound right. I built an SR-71 kit as a kid. But I was born in 1977. I wish I still had it. I put a ton of work into it. The model manufacturers did scoop the reveals at some points, but they were never that accurate. I had an "F-19 Stealth Fighter" kit I built as well. It had significant differences from the F-117 when that became public.

ilamont 4y ago

Ironically, the plane was dripping, much like the misshapen model had assembled in my youth. Fuel was seeping through the joints, raining down on the hangar floor. At Mach 3, the plane would expand several inches because of the severe temperature, which could heat the leading edge of the wing to 1,100 degrees. To prevent cracking, expansion joints had been built into the plane. Sealant resembling rubber glue covered the seams, but when the plane was subsonic, fuel would leak through the joints. Wouldn't this be a major hazard on the ground?

brianwawok 4y ago
You do what you gotta do. Spending millions per flight, you can have some guys in a golf cart with kitty litter follow the plane around the hanger.
icegreentea2 4y ago
Yes. But also the fuel used was also very difficult to light (consequence of it's design requirements), so at least as a fire hazard, it was probably relatively well controlled. Uh health risks... shrug. The pilot is wearing most of a space suit. Who knows whats up with the ground crew though.
saganus 4y ago
In the "Skunk Works" book they explain that you could throw a lit cigarette directly into a puddle of fuel and it would not ignite, due to the very high temps needed.
- 93po 4y ago
  Cigarettes also won't ignite regular car gas
  - pc86 4y ago
    Yes but for a different reason - car gas because it's the vapors which ignite, so if you toss a cigarette on a fresh puddle of car gas you're going to have a very bad day. For planes it's due to the much higher temperatures required, the worst thing you'll do tossing a cigarette into a fresh puddle of jet fuel is burn your finger.

FpUser 4y ago

Kelly was an absolutely amazing person. A giant.

carbl 4y ago

No mention of the big block GM V8s on a wagon that was used as a crank to start the engines. They went through a couple of units.

anonymousiam 4y ago

Some interesting trivia: The SR-71 began as the YF-12, and was originally supposed to be RS-71 (Reconnaissance/Surveillance), but somebody thought SR sounded better. The YF prefix on the original aircraft is often referred to as "Yankee Fire", a caveat that is still in use.

swasheck 4y ago
legend is that president johnson got it confused in a press conference and called it the sr-71 so instead of correcting him they just changed the name. "skunk works" is a great read. i'm almost done with "area 51" by annie jacobsen and it's quite the interesting read as well, though it does get dry at times. https://openlibrary.org/works/OL15839422W/Area_51 https://openlibrary.org/works/OL15839422W/Area_51
- chipsa 4y ago
  The correct part of the legend is that the speech he was reading off of said SR-71, because someone thought it sounded better, and getting it spoken by the President was easier than doing it the "Right" way.
  - swasheck 4y ago
    thank you. i really appreciate that clarification. it's always nice to learn new things.
laverya 4y ago
Pretty sure that the CIA's A-12s came before the YF-12 interceptor prototype.

Synaesthesia 4y ago

I guess it was pretty incredible watching a missile fly down an air vent, pretty unbelievable, but couldn’t we feasibly use that same technology to shoot food to hungry people? You know what I mean? Fly over the Ethiopia: “There’s a guy that needs a banana!” Stealth banana. Smart fruit!

knodi123 4y ago
This is a quote from a Bill Hicks standup routine. https://youtu.be/1o_8b31GRnU?t=49 https://youtu.be/1o_8b31GRnU?t=49

mongol 4y ago

I remember my manager was obsessed with the plane and it's name. It sounded so cool. But then I told him what bird it really is (Koltrast in Swedish) and he seemed so disappointed. He probably thought it was a black Eagle or something. Here the Blackbird is mostly known för its beautiful although melancholic song. And it is also the national bird of Sweden.

noefingway 4y ago

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. Back then you could drive up to and park at the upper departure level. So there we are, waiting... Someone brought a portable scanner along and was listening to air traffic control, so we knew when it would pass over. First thing we heard was the sonic boom as it passed over (I believe this flight set the west coast to east coast speed record.) After some interval of minutes we heard which direction it would be coming from. All other landing and take off traffic was suspended while the bird circled the airport. Then turned a made a low level (like about the height of the tower) really slow. We got a really good look at it. He hit the afterburners, and took off. I've never seen anything move that fast. It practically disappeared, like something out of a movie jumping into hyperspace. Absolutely incredible, no matter how much I read about the SR-71 and the program, I'm just in awe of the designers and engineers that made it happen.

vr46 4y ago
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.
- mattygee 4y ago
  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 :)

calmoo 4y ago

If anyone has a vague interest in this airplane - I would highly reccommend seeing it in the flesh, it is probably the most incredible piece of machinery I have seen. I have seen two different ones, one in the Seattle flight museum, and another in a flight museum in Riverside, CA.

simonebrunozzi 4y ago

> The Blackbird had outrun nearly 4,000 missiles, not once taking a scratch from enemy fire. Truly amazing.