CannibalZ3 From United States of America, joined May 2001, 392 posts, RR: 0 Posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2131 times:
There was a special type of KC-135 that was built to fuel the SR-71, but I was told recently that a KC-10 could also be used. Are there no special modifications needed to carry SR-71 fuel?
The temperature of the SR-71 skin must get fantastically hot, hot enough to melt paint. How do you paint one of those things?
Under what circumstances are SR-71s and U-2s used? Is there any kind of replacement or equal?
I understand that the radar warning receivers on U-2s are highly classified, suggesting some very interesting systems. Is it possible they are supported by RC-135s or something?
Have any of you ever seen a U-2 or SR-71 in flight? Or, god forbid, flown one or dealt with one operationally?
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29366 posts, RR: 61 Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2088 times:
The paint on the SR-71 was developed for the aircraft. I understanding developing the colored paint for the national insignia was a pain.
The Q model was the version of the KC-135 that carried the SR-71's fuel. Somebody else will have to get into specific differences though.
The electonic suits on any of those aircraft vary based on mission, and when the last time it was updated.
Seen the U-2 a couple of times at airshows, that is it.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29366 posts, RR: 61 Reply 2, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2065 times:
Oh I forgot to add that if you look at photos of the original A-12 aircraft, you will see that a lot(all?) of them are natural metal on the leading edges.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
Bungle From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2076 times:
I believe that all the KC135Q tankers were converted to KC135T after the SR71 was retired.
I have not heard of any KC10s modified to carry the special jp7 fuel the SR71 required.
Im not sure what modifications were done to the KC135Q but the SR71 fuel has to be preheated before fueling the A/C.
Spacepope From Vatican City, joined Dec 1999, 2744 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2057 times:
The main diference between the KC-135Q and -T versus the -E and -R are that the tanks that carry the offloadable fuel are seperated from the ones that the tanker uses. This eliminates the possibility of the tanker trying to use JP-7, which has a much higher flashpoint than Jet-A or equivalent feuls, and is unuseable by the tankers engines.
CX747 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 4385 posts, RR: 5 Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2022 times:
The U-2 program is currently having its cockpit upgraded as there is no replacement in site. When the SR-71 program shut down, the U.S. lost a great asset that has not been replaced.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
CannibalZ3 From United States of America, joined May 2001, 392 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2036 times:
Does anyone know how much these things cost to operate?
KROC From United States of America, joined May 2000, 19737 posts, RR: 75 Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2008 times:
I was stationed at Beale AFB, home of the U-2's here in the states as my last Air Force assignment. I was lucky enough to be able to sit in the cockpit of a U-2, and ride in the case car a couple of times with my Commander. He even let me drive once. Hard to believe that the U-2 is 1950's technology and it is still going strong today!
"Never tell anybody outside the family what you're thinking again"