SR-71 with odd payload on its spine. Anyone know what was it ?

[-]

Professional-Trust75@reddit

It's also for the smaller plane they attempted to be able to deploy from the back. In the skunk works book this is talked about briefly.

Kelly said they only made the one before it was changed to test that engine. It was also the only blackbird to be lost in testing according to the book.

[-]

TwoShedsJackson1@reddit

That is interesting. I thought there were 12 Blackbirds lost including take offs and landings. The last one was in 1989 probably out of Okinawa?

There was an SR-71 which crashed close to Groom Lake and the air force did a quiet cleanup and might never have been officially recorded.

[-]

Altogether, there were 50 Blackbirds built (including all variants: A-12, YF-12A, M-21, and SR-71). Of those, 20 were destroyed in accidents (A-12, 5 lost; YF-12A, 2 lost; M-21, 1 lost; SR-71, 12 lost). I have visited nine of the crash sites.

[-]

TwoShedsJackson1@reddit

Thanks you know a lot more than most. I thought there were 36 Blackbirds and forgot about the variants. Did you find the crash site near Groom Lake? Wikipedia only refers to 12 crashes.

[-]

Peter_Merlin@reddit

I have visited the A-12 crash site that's about 70 miles from Groom Lake, near Leith, Nevada, as well as the one 14 miles south of Wendover. There were a couple of A-12 crashes at Groom Lake, one on the lakebed itself and the other south of the runway. You can read all about them in Dreamland: The Secret History of Area 51 (Schiffer Publishing, 2023).

I've been to SR-71 crash sites in California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas; a YF-12A at Edwards AFB, California; and a D-21B in central Nevada.

[-]

TwoShedsJackson1@reddit

Sorry for the delay, I share your interest in the Blackbird and needed time to follow resources.

"A-12 (60-6928 / 125 - This aircraft was lost on 5 January 1967 during a training sortie flown from Groom Lake. Following the onset of a fuel emergency caused by a failing fuel gauge, the aircraft ran out of fuel only minutes before landing. CIA pilot Walter Ray was forced to eject. Unfortunately, during ejection, the man-seat separation sequence malfunctioned and Ray was killed on impact with the ground, still strapped to his seat. "

This is written by a blogger in California who has tracked down lost people in Death Valley, sometimes years later, others just in time .An excellent writer who is worth reading.

Here is the link to his page. He found the site of the A12 which was clean exceot for military meals detritus, then found some pieces of titanium. The blogger does not say where because he dislikes souvenir hunters.

[-]

Peter_Merlin@reddit

Yes, I helped Tom search for that A-12 crash site. There was a lot of interesting stuff there. Some other guys went in years later and pulled out a bunch of surprisingly large pieces of titanium.

In 2003, I located the A-12 (60-6926/Article 123) crash site near Wendover. The official, declassified, CIA documents included a message from the on-site recovery team commander to CIA Headquarters assuring that "all traces [of the airplane] had been removed from the crash scene." Spoiler alert: they were not.

If you want more information, I wrote detailed descriptions of both these mishaps in my book, Dreamland: The Secret History of Area 51.

You are correct. The final Blackbird loss took place on 21 April 1989 over the South China Sea. SR-71A (61-7974 / Art. 2025) crashed when an engine blew up and shrapnel severed hydraulic lines, causing a loss of flight controls. Maj. Dan House and Capt. Blair Bozek ejected safely.

[-]

Known-Associate8369@reddit

I think you have your references mixed up.

The aircraft involved in the LASRE experiments was SR-71 #61-7980 - it had a successful flight life and was eventually retired in 1999.

Its currently on display as gate guard for NASA Dryden Flight Research Center at Edwards AFB.

What you might be referring to is the M-21, which was a variant of the A-12 (the precursor to the SR-71), which was designed to carry the D-21 drone and launch it at supersonic speeds. One of two M-21 aircraft was lost during a drone launch test.

12 SR-71s were lost during the fleets lifetime.

6 A-12s or M-21s were also lost.

[-]

Professional-Trust75@reddit

Ah yes! My bad. Haven't had the book in a long time. You are right. I knew there were 2 items for lack of better word that fit there. Forgot they made the pre Sr 71 lol.

[-]

Bucephalus307@reddit

Looks like a Mr Fusion to run the flux capacitor.

[-]

FixIndividual7586@reddit

I came here looking for this comment.

[-]

Creepy_Carpet_2450@reddit

Wood stove

[-]

Temporary_Heron3028@reddit

It’s not the sr-71 it’s a m-21 a version of the sr71 most likely

[-]

danit0ba94@reddit

I don't know why my mind went straight to a monster

[-]

Obvious_Animal_2083@reddit

This was NASA’s test bed for a prototype linear aerospike engine they were developing.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_Aerospike_SR-71_Experiment

[-]

KokoTheTalkingApe@reddit

That's fascinating.

Aerospike seems like an idea that is almost there, but delays, mostly from lack of R&D money, keep getting in the way.

[-]

A_Vandalay@reddit

The technology just isn’t worth the mass and completely investment. Even if you and a 100% reliable aero spike today, it would still be heavier per unit thrust and have more complexity related costs than a traditional bell nozzle engine. Those tend to be the two biggest variables engineers need to optimize against. And what you end up with is an engine thats doesn’t outperform a vacuum engine and doesn’t outperform a sea level engine. So as long as you stick to a traditional staging architecture it’s not beneficial form either a cost or mass perspective. It might work well in a stage and a half design where fuel tanks at dropped but one engine maintains thrust from liftoff to orbit, but that in itself would require a whole additional set of fuel pumping hardware.

[-]

KokoTheTalkingApe@reddit

But people keep working on it (see other comments for projects nearing completion; Wikipedia lists others).

To me, if it becomes viable even in a limited set of circumstances, it's still another trick that engineers can pull out when it's needed. So there's value in that.

It strikes me that the SR-71 treats were run about 25 years ago, and that numerous attempts to make it work failed for some reason unrelated to the tech, like labor of funding. It makes me wish the government would do more to support this kind of basic, pre-commercial research. Other capitalist countries do it. Who knows, maybe we wouldn't have needed to rely on Russian heavy lifters for so long.

[-]

nickgreydaddyfingers@reddit

Yes, because it's already a well-known engine that fits the needs of some of these organizations. I doubt you'll find American defense manufactures coming out with anything significant relating this.

[-]

iCameToLearnSomeCode@reddit

The question isn't if it's got as much thrust as a single bell nozzle for the mass.

The question is whether it has more thrust than two bell nozzles for the mass.

If you're using a bell nozzle you need an atmospheric engine and a vacuum engine on board.

With an areospike you can in theory use the same engine the whole time.

[-]

Ws6fiend@reddit

Wouldn't the reduction in space debris be worth it? I'd assume multiple stage rockets as good as they are today still generate more debris than a vehicle that doesn't have a separation phase.

[-]

GavoteX@reddit

Most staging happens on a sub-orbital trajectory so that any debris created re-enters rapidly and burns up.

[-]

bubliksmaz@reddit

So as long as you stick to a traditional staging architecture it’s not beneficial from either a cost or mass perspective

Well yeah, I thought the whole point of them was for SSTO?

[-]

A_Vandalay@reddit

That’s one application. But SSTOs are a whole mother can of worms. And while they might be technically possible with chemical rockets they would significantly reduce the amount of payload to orbit thus massively increasing cost

[-]

Dafrandle@reddit

If an SSTO can take off from a normal airport they also eliminate a large amount of the logistical costs of a normal rocket.

Not enough to make normal rockets be replaced - but probably enough to eliminate rocket trips just to move people around.

I imagine an SSTO will be far less effected by weather than normal rockets and they don't have to take off over the ocean because they are not dropping stages

they would offer a flexibility that rockets cant match

if a viable one is ever made it will be used with rockets - not replace them.

[-]

30yearCurse@reddit

Zero understanding of the technology, but does not each generation of the product usually get better?

When I have seen pictures of Falcron engines they seem super complex with lots of plumbing, and newer versions see to be much less complex. That could be because they are missing chucks of the engine,.

[-]

Dear-Ad1329@reddit

So I was thinking spool of string so they can find their way back home. And you are telling me that is not correct? Wild man, absolutely wild.

[-]

Mywifefoundmymain@reddit

They abandoned it because Performance didn’t justify the added weight/complexity of the design.

[-]

KokoTheTalkingApe@reddit

Except it's not abandoned. There are several projects that are set to fly aerospikes right now. The comments mention a few of them.

[-]

Mywifefoundmymain@reddit

NASA had abandoned it. I don’t know if they are revisiting it or not.

[-]

KokoTheTalkingApe@reddit

Yes, but NASA doesn't develop tech all the way to commercial viability. They conduct research up to a few notches below that.

The projects developing aerospikes now, with fits and starts and pointless setbacks, are all commercial.

[-]

Hattix@reddit

It's an almost-insurmountable problem of materials science.

Aerospikes only make sense if they're reusable and what kind of material do you make the spike from? It's got to sit inside rocket exhaust. That's the problem.

[-]

redmercuryvendor@reddit

Plenty of aerospike engines have been tested at full scale, both linear (e.g. XRS-2200) and annular (e.g. J-2T).

The problems are not technical, but practicl. Nobody needs an engine with kinda-OK performance over a large range of ambient pressures. SSTOs are not viable, and as you need to have multiple stages anyway, having regular De Laval nozzles optimised for the pressure ranges those stages will be operating in saves mass and reduces complexity.

[-]

TheGottVater@reddit

Lack visible R&D money. There’s always the ‘black budget’. look it up.

[-]

Lirdon@reddit

Aerospike just creates a solution that isn’t worth the effort. A rocket engine that can work on low and high pressures alike is cool, but why do you need such a complex thing if you can’t afford carrying empty weight of a tank to orbit and thus going to do staging anyways? Just have two engines, one atmospheric on the booster and one vacuum for the second stage and be done with it.

[-]

dancingcuban@reddit

There’s some really good breakdowns on aerospikes out there. It has the jack of all trades, master of none problem. They aren’t as good as an atmo optimized engine in atmo, and they aren’t as good as a vacuum optimized engine in vacuum. They’re heavy and they don’t fix all of the other fundamental rocket equation problems with SSTO.

So if you’re going to need to stage, it’s easier just to take one of each rather than try to make one engine do both.

[-]

Actual-Money7868@reddit

Polaris conducted a successful aerospike roll-test a few days ago

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/polaris-spaceplanes_mira-ii-successfully-conducts-aerospike-roll-test-activity-7259494465743077378-OAKO

[-]

Domspun@reddit

man that looks cool.

[-]

loghead03@reddit

It’s one of those things that I suspect is much further along than publicly disclosed.

[-]

Mobryan71@reddit

Stoke Space is doing an almost-aerospike on their new rocket second stage.

[-]

TwoShedsJackson1@reddit

What is extraordinary is that an SR-71 was still flying in 1998 when the Blackbird was retired in 1989. Fortunately some were kept operational and interest was revived mid-1990s for conflict in the Middle East.

Ultimately NASA kept two planes flying until 1999 which is why this wonderful photo exists. Look like above Groom Lake.

[-]

Hyperswell@reddit

Got to see this in person at Edwards in the 90’s it was quite the sight to see!

[-]

Prudent-Bathroom3245@reddit

Looks like a roll of paper towels

[-]

DueRepresentative518@reddit

It likes you very very much 🥰🥰

[-]

technobrendo@reddit

It looks like a roll of paper towels. Must be really REALLY stuck on there

[-]

Glockamoli@reddit

Poor thing has a parasitic wasp infection

[-]

Narrow_Ad_7671@reddit

Oh wow, I remember that. I worked the KC-135T (58-0095) that refueled that SR-71 back in the late 90s. Got sent from McConnell AFB to Edwards AFB for 5 months of sitting around doing absolutely nothing at all and getting paid very well to do it. Boring as hell. We only did a handful of flights (less than 10), but it let us skip winter in KS and it paid for 100% of my new car.

[-]

Still_Explanation427@reddit

Looks like AirPods to me…

[-]

chiefkyljoy@reddit

Mr. Fusion?

[-]

soggy_nacho_409@reddit

The world's largest and fastest joint.

[-]

photonoobie@reddit

This is definitely a Mr. Fusion.

[-]

Bentbenny75@reddit

That’s a Flux capacitor

[-]

KaiHazardvertz@reddit

Looks like a penguin, to me.

[-]

Hwidditor@reddit

It's 2024!

Where is my aerospike!

[-]

alx-carbon@reddit

It’s Mr. Fusion

[-]

cloud1445@reddit

You know when you put your can of soda on the roof of your car so you can get your keys out of your pocket, and then forget it’s there and drive off?

[-]

clamdigger@reddit

The team at Lockheed’s Skunkworks found that the only way they could make the SR-71 cooler was to give it a giant unfiltered cigarette sticking right out of the top.

[-]

Triumph807@reddit

Looks like he’s buttsmoking it

[-]

Fadenos@reddit

What an awesome looking plane! Still feel so lucky for getting to see one in person ( was a museum but still gotta see one)!!!

[-]

wireknot@reddit

Oh, that is curious.

[-]

Over_Newspaper3909@reddit

More like a photo shopped image of a paint roller atop a black bird

[-]

No-Syllabub742@reddit

It’s the flux capacitor!

[-]

WhyDontWeLearn@reddit

You're sure not going to go Mach 85 (or whatever that beautiful flying machine can actually do) with that thing bolted on.

[-]

TwoShedsJackson1@reddit

They ran it up to Mach 1.8 but Mach 3.5 would have been destructive lol

[-]

boner79@reddit

"It's a mail plane"

"How can you tell?"

[-]

MacMacMacbeth@reddit

Evangelion entry plug

[-]

Curmudgeon@reddit

R1D1

[-]

ViperShark679@reddit

the monolith

[-]

star_chicken@reddit

Pool noodle

[-]

FartInGenDirection@reddit

Speed Snorkel

[-]

Scary-Celebration-98@reddit

Toilet paper

[-]

KathiSterisi@reddit

Wednesday morning high speed tampon delivery to The View studio.

[-]

Stanislovakia@reddit

It was toilet paper for the pilots for long flights.

[-]

NSYK@reddit

That’s how you know that Blackbird is a boy

[-]

AggravatingProof@reddit

Hh%hh%&h%%&ĥ]

[-]

Facosa99@reddit

Nu uh, its clearly a girl. They gave her a tampon

[-]

Budget_Foundation747@reddit

When you need a lotta toilet paper heckin fast.

[-]

cazub@reddit

Awesome nobody made a boner joke yet , "it just likes you a lot"

[-]

Nuclear_Geek@reddit

"It's rushing to deliver your mom's tampon."?

[-]

Millerpainkiller@reddit

He saw a lady SR 71

[-]

GeneralBisV@reddit

Aerospike engine from nasa, if you wanna see some more pictures of it, along with practically all other models and prototypes from the blackbird program I do recommend the Lockheed Blackbird family Photo Scrapbook, it has a ton of photos that aren’t in other books along with quite a sizable chunk of info to go with each photo. A great read

[-]

91361_throwaway@reddit (OP)

Very, very cool. Thabks

[-]

Drenlin@reddit

Is that the spine from an M-21?

[-]

91361_throwaway@reddit (OP)

No the M-21 fairing/mount was much, much thinner.

https://images.app.goo.gl/9CHCmgZTwyr3ZY4WA

[-]

Additional photos: https://www.nasa.gov/gallery/sr-71-blackbird/

[-]

frenchfriedtaters79@reddit

I believe it was a linear aerospike test rig. NASA tested it while developing the x-36 IIRC.