
Skunk Works Reveals SR-71 Successor Plan - starpilot
http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/awx_11_01_2013_p0-632731.xml
======
ck2
If we cannot have manned moon missions anymore and no more space shuttles then
I don't want the military to have SR71 successors or their own mini-shuttle.

Our priorities are all screwed up, we need to be making science exciting for
the next generation.

We'll always have plenty of warmongering to go around.

Many of you around here are too young or not from the USA to have this
experience but I remember when the first shuttle was being developed and
tested and how exciting that was to schoolkids (it was the Enterprise! [1])
And I was fortunate enough to have someone from NASA visit our elementary
school with moon rocks and gave us space photos and other presentations that
were so interesting that I remember the experience to this day.

We need that again for school kids.

[1]
[http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/Star_Trek_cast...](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/Star_Trek_cast_and_Space_Shuttle_Enterprise.jpg)

~~~
melling
Is there a standard answer when someone complains about the "war machine" and
incorrect priorities? It's kind of common in this crowd, and probably not the
proper way to look at it. To me, it's a Frequently Mentioned Complaint.

Certainly many of us here wish there was more money spent on big science. For
example, if the US built Super Collider 20 years ago, what we are discovering
in physics today, would have been discovered almost 2 decades ago:

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_Super_Collider)

Anyway, the US spends a fortune on its military. The cost was something like
20 billion for air conditioning in the Iraq war? (that's one supercollider).
Until we have that ever elusive world peace, we're probably going to continue
to spend a fortune. Having the military spend some of its money on new SR71's,
robotic vehicles, the Internet, drones, etc isn't going to be cheapest
research but fewer people question it, and the research does get done.

Consider that if we didn't need national defense, people would probably just
want lower taxes and you still couldn't convince them to go to the moon.
There's nothing there, after all.

~~~
drzaiusapelord
>Until we have that ever elusive world peace, we're probably going to continue
to spend a fortune.

We spend 10x what China does. We don't have to spend as much.

>people would probably just want lower taxes

Heaven forbid I have more cash in my wallet. More for me to invest to help
fund companies that do interesting things, perhaps even go to the moon with. I
personally don't mind my tax load if it gave us things like universal
healthcare and cheaper higher education and better infrastructure. I do mind
it when it just powers the various killing machines at our disposal and wars
based on clear lies like "yellowcake" and "WMDs." How many Mars missions did
Iraq cost us?

>and the research does get done.

Locked away as classified or patent encumbered via Lockheed or whoever is
developing $expensive_weapons_system? Yeah, we can do better.

edit: The list linked on spending doesn't include all the special spending
bills that paid for the Iraq and Afghani wars. Yes, we are close to spending
10x what Russia spends and probably closer to 5 or 6x what China spends. I
mixed up my countries, but we are GREATLY overspending. NASA's annual budget
is about a month in Afghanistan.

We've spend at LEAST 2 trillion in Iraq and Afghanistan. 4 is you count actual
expenditures and future commitments like medical and disability.

[http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/14/iraq-war-cost-
more-...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/14/iraq-war-cost-more-
than-2-trillion_n_2875493.html)

~~~
greedo
However, we don't have to worry just about China. We have to worry about Iran,
NK, China, Russia, etc. So just looking at what China spends isn't that
useful.

~~~
mcv
Because Iran and North Korea are a threat to the US in what fantasy world
exactly? China and Russia matter. Iran and North Korea are just diversions.

~~~
greedo
Military planning doesn't really think in terms of threats as much as
capabilities. Despite the last 60 years, friends often turn into
competitors/enemies when you least expect it.

~~~
mcv
I wasn't suggesting Iran and North Korea were friends. I was suggesting they
lack capabilities.

~~~
greedo
If you think NK lacks the capabilities to affect the US, you're misguided. Or
you don't care about US troops stationed in South Korea, Okinawa, etc. Same
with Iran. It doesn't take much to cause trouble. Ask the dead Marines killed
by Iranian backed terror groups in Lebanon in the 1980's.

------
Theodores
This is Lockheed Martin we are talking about.

The same Lockheed Martin that pretty much built (and is) the NSA, the same
Lockheed Martin that processes the census, the same Lockheed Martin that
processes the tax returns, the same Lockheed Martin that can test your DNA,
the same Lockheed Martin that makes the Trident nukes, the same Lockheed
Martin that builds the spy satellites, the same Lockheed Martin that can
supply 'interrogators' to Guantanamo, the same Lockheed Martin that supplied
the planes that went in first in Iraq, the same Lockheed Martin that owns
Afghanistan (to all intents and purposes) and the same Lockheed Martin that
owns all the politicians in Washington.

If they want this then they can get you to pay for it.

~~~
evacuationdrill
>the same Lockheed Martin that processes the tax returns

I don't understand this one. Are they behind the IRS's systems or something?

~~~
gamblor956
It's just FUD. In 2007, LM was awarded a minor contract to help update the
IRS' technology systems: (1)to modernize the notice system (referring to
notices received by taxpayers under audit or for penalty assessments) and the
publication system (the pdf's available on the IRS website. (See
[http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-
releases/2007/oc...](http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-
releases/2007/october/1026_LMWins2ContractsToHelpModernizeIRSTechnology.html))

Lockheed Martin was not involved in helping the IRS design or update its
return processing system (including e-file). A contract of that magnitude
would be worth billions, not the $36 million LM was paid for the work above.

------
Shihan
Why would Skunk Work make something like that public? Do I miss something or
wouldn't that be really weird? I thought normally such military related
technological projects are only released to the public after they cannot
longer hide it (e.g. like 'Beast of Kandahar' etc.).

~~~
moogleii
I figure to gain much-needed political capital somehow. It's probably a dead-
in-the-water project, and they need some mil-industry complex saber rattling
to give it a much needed (desperate) jump start. Because it sounds pretty
useless to me.

The article claims there's a growing intel gap, and yet what's changed since
the original was retired (other than satellite coverage getting better, +
unmanned drones)? It's probably still going to be ridiculously expensive to
operate, and provides what advantages? Who are we going to use this on? The
only nations that can probably deny us satellite coverage, at least
politically, are China and Russia, and are we really going to start flying
hypersonic jets over their airspace anyway? This whole thing just makes me
laugh.

~~~
ZoFreX
> The only nations that can probably deny us satellite coverage, at least
> politically, are China and Russia

It's pretty easy to deny satellite coverage. It's trivial to track satellite
locations, and they pass over on a very regular schedule (they can't just up
and change orbit on a whim). All you have to do is cover everything sensitive
with a tarp at the time they fly over. Anyone can do this, and it was one of
the main tactics used by the USSR and China against spy satellites during the
cold war.

> and are we really going to start flying hypersonic jets over their airspace
> anyway?

If you can make it stealthy enough they won't even know ;) And you can also
collect a lot of useful intel by flying a plane just outside the border (you
can scan inside the border with radar, you can learn about their radar systems
by recording all radar frequencies you see, you can record all radio chatter,
and so on).

Atmospheric flights definitely still have a role to play in espionage.

~~~
mikeash
Atmospheric? Sure. Hypersonic? Why?

The SR-71's high speed and altitude was useful, and worth its high cost, for
two reasons:

1\. It was impossible to shoot down.

2\. You could go check something out on short notice.

#1 doesn't really matter with drones, especially if you're not going to
overfly the target country. #2 is easily solved by keeping a bunch of slow
drones in the air all over the place at all times, rather than keeping fast
aircraft ready to fly.

~~~
ZoFreX
I agree completely, I didn't intend to argue that this particular plane or one
like it is necessary (especially as I haven't managed to read the linked
article yet!), but that satellites alone are not sufficient and some form of
atmospheric craft still has value at the moment.

Interestingly they were already experimenting with drones back when they were
flying the Blackbird - I wonder how good they are now?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Hypersonic aircraft serve only one purpose now that drones and satellites
exist: highly mobile weapons platform.

------
Kilo-byte
Mirror since the original link is unavailable

[http://pastebin.com/HqmzuAZ4](http://pastebin.com/HqmzuAZ4)

------
kevincennis
It's the Aurora, resurrected!

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_(aircraft)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurora_\(aircraft\))

------
kayoone
an incredible story related to the SR71:
[http://roadrunnersinternationale.com/weaver_sr71_bailout.htm...](http://roadrunnersinternationale.com/weaver_sr71_bailout.html)

------
jonlucc
This can fly around Earth at the equator in 5 hours.

------
ihsw
It'll be another F-35 nightmare.

------
macmac
HN killed aviationweek.com...

------
zobzu
tl;dr;didntload: they talk about a scramjet design

