Agreed.

Flatland flyover in a flash!

If you're the friendly type, it takes years to "do Nebraska."

​@@kmoecubHow long did it take Debbie to do Dallas?

Now that is ideal!

Me either!! RIP Brian…

La speed check Classic

As a aviation historian, met him several times, was always willing to talk about the blackbird and answer any questions I had.

Speed check ego crusher

I too was shocked to hear of his passing. I feel I just heard his episode on the fighter pilot podcast just last year.😢

What the doors adjusted how opened and closed they were during different maneuvers? I was not aware of that I just thought they opened when they were using the engine as a ramjet for thrust as opposed to when they were using the turbines for thrust. I didn't know that the doors actually fluctuated depending on what they were doing

In the 70's the declassified top speed was over Mach 3.2. Flip those numbers and you get Mach 2.3. To which I have a question for you: What two U.S. acft, both fighters in operation today, can attain a nearly identical Mach 3.2 top speed, and perhaps greater?

​@@cassiespencer6134bros onto nothing by flipping these numbers 😂

@@benvaun1330 Not so much different maneuvers but for different speeds/Mach numbers. Wikipedia has some great resources on J58 operation including all the scheduling you are talking about.

Thank you for keeping us safe !

We called the AB fire "Diamonds".

Pucker-up, buttercup.

That is a gross oversimplification. Most missiles will hit Mach 10. Outrunning a missile's targetting capabilities is probably more accurate.

The missiles ARE in fact faster... But they still have to climb to 80,000 feet and close the gap before they run out of fuel. Even when the opposition is throwing a telephone pole at you, that's a very difficult task.

Yes. A missile launches towards a calculated intercept point, and if the aircraft accelerates, that pushes the intercept point further away because the missile has to fly to the NEW (and constantly moving-further-away, if the acceleration continues) intercept point. So the aircraft doesn't have to actually out-speed the missile; it only has to push the intercept point out-of-range of the missile. That being said, at operational speeds the SR-71 accelerated like a scalded rabbit. It couldn't pull more than about 3 G's in a turn, but its signature move was ACCELERATION. With the engines in ramjet mode, there were no turbines to spool up. More fuel was simply sprayed into the combustion chamber and the acceleration was instantaneous. It would slam the pilots back in their seats like a sports car. The rate at which the SR-71 could accelerate was in that ballpark. So it makes sense that the SR-71 would normally operate significantly BELOW its maximum speed, so that it could ACCELERATE if a missile was launched.

A funny thing about my comment, is that the post time was only a minute after Truex007. I wasn't even responding to him, but it's now going to look like I was thanks to that timing, and how well my comment just happens to work as a rebuttle. I am amused.

That’s actually pretty common for jet engines to have graphite wear rings and gas seals. Not sure how common it was when the J58 was designed though.

Thats my neighborhood. Saw the Thunderbirds fly there before it closed.

I worked in the J-58 overhaul section 577 at P&W WPB FL for the last year of production and have seen the insides of them many times....and can say that it's an amazing engine but nothing needs to be replaced after every flight. There ARE thermal limits on various components that if exceeded will shorten their TBO and the only case of something needing replacing after a flight would likely involve a massive pilot error and the guys who flew them were absolute professionals who didn't do things like to their aircraft. For sure it's possible that somewhere sometime somebody pushed one WAY beyond the normal operating conditions which then needed repair before another flight...but that would be an exception rather than the rule I think. Every engine was test run extensively including a 33 minute 'Qualification Run' at full Military Power where fuel flow, thrust and all temperatures and pressures were carefully monitored before the engine was released out to the field. Of course this was at Sea Level and full Afterburner but not involving the compressor bypass tubes that ran straight back to the burner can which were used over Mach 2. The real engineering genius in the Blackbirds was in the inlet ducting where the Mach 3+ airflow slowed down under control to subsonic velocity to be fed to the engine. Information about the ducting and how it worked is well worth a read if you are interested in such things...the guys who designed it were from another world. Anyway....should something internal need replacing the engine would have been sent back to the plant and another installed from their spares in the field. Even working in the overhaul section things were compartmentalized and few people had free run through every system and component. I worked on the afterburners, fuel system and compressor sections and wasn't privvy to the turbine so can't comment on how or if they were sealed. For sure the compressor blades are sealed on the ends as most modern high performance turbines are today. Nothing sounded like a J-58...it's a 'Big Block' motor that doesn't spin real fast like the F-100's and F-119's do so the sound is a deep guttural ROAR that shakes you inside...just glorious and I'm very sad that nobody will ever hear one again.

@@JohnMaxGriffin Definitely unique for a Pratt and Whitney engine. It's almost always brush seals.

My brother in-law was an Air Traffic Controller for the Navy in Jacksonville FL. He said an SR-71 passed through his airspace headed for Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. It came back through his airspace 4 hours later.

There is an old tale where an SR71 pilot radioed the tower asking for permission to enter flight level 70. The tower laughed and asked "How the hell do you plan on getting your aircraft to flight level 70?". The pilot answered "By descending."

@@wally7856 My friend worked for Houston Center said they had a similar call requesting flight level 600. They said "Sure buddy, if you think you can make it up there, go for it!" a quick response "Thank you center, descending to 600"

in the early 70's one lost fuel a couple hundred miles west of san francisco and landed in kansas city.

Hahahahaha that's a gigantic leap for a plane in an emergency...imagine if every plane on the planet could do that,it would be the perfect world with no accidents

My dad was in the Air Force temporarily assigned in the UK and overheard a U2 declare emergency (flame out) as it was passing over England on its way out of Europe headed towards the US. The controller asked if the U2 wanted them to scramble the Azores? Pilot’s response: naaa, I’ll just glide it back to Edwards… so, the plan, with the engine not running and powering the plane is to glide all the way across the Atlantic ocean and then all the way across the continental United States… The machines (and many of the men operating them) of that era seem so much better than what we appear to have today.

This doesn't line up with the reality of what limits the top speed of that plane. It's not thrust or drag limited, it's safety limited. The engines had plenty of thrust to accelerate it well past its top speed, but doing so would cause them to melt. There's nothing about the shape of the aircraft or the engine intakes that could change the temperature of the intake air.

@toby1248 Something like water methanol injection could most definitely cool the air in the intake....since heat is the biggest killer of a diesel, i use a 2 nozzle spray in my diesels charge pipe before the air enters the cylinders...it atomizes before entering the cylinders and only provides a cold air, it doesn't actually burn or cause cylinder wash. So I'm sure they could use something to cool the air enough to allow more power out of it, atleast to a certain point...what that would be or how much you'd need to continue cooling the air, I have zero clue...getting enough of it on board to keep it fed may be the issue with that idea, I'm sure it sucks the fuel down, so therfore water/meth mix.

@@toby1248 Would an improvement in the aerodynamics of the inlet result in a reduction in friction from the air and therefore a little less heat?

Aligns with what I have heard.

@@yamahakid450f water/meth mix... I'm sure there's a few truckers that might agree with that mix... no but seriously that is really cool to hear about and understand a bit of. thank you for sharing.

Yeah, i always laugh at these types of assertions - people are officially sworn to secrecy…yet somehow they openly make statements punishable as treason. So they’re stating the actual, exact capabilities… YEAH, SURE.

A somewhat secret plane that hasn't been in service for over 30 years now. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the real top speed were to be declassified in the next 2 decades. Then again, the USAF is quite sensitive of such things. The kept the entire existence of the unimpressive Project Mogul spy balloon (which crashed at Roswell) classified for something like 40 years *by accident.*

No, I don't think anyone thinks that. And certainly not Alex.

It could probably go faster but it disintegrating in flight its a matter of numbers

And that official record? At least for a longer transcontinental distance, hat was set when the 'supposedly last' plane was on its retirement flight from the west coast to Dulles airport to be given to the Smithsonian.

Well, there’s stuff in space that makes Mach 3 look like walking speed.

You would think but technological developments like satelites and high speed missiles have made spy planes pretty useless and combat aicraft dont get up to those speeds since it requires making many sacrafices in the design. Hence why the SR-71 hasnt been beat. There are some 6th gen combat aircraft designs talking about speeds past mach 4 to add kinetic energy to the missiles so there might be a prototype or two flying around somewhere but no aircraft in service.

All I know is that, when Top Gun: Maverick came out, the Chinese shit a brick. Why? Because of the SR-72, aka the Darkstar, in the film, The Chinese reasoned that, if the US and Skunk Works were going public with that, then who knows what they're working on behind closed doors?

If there going public with it , it's at least 20 yrs old.

Aurora, for one.

plus. The max cant be disclosed. I mean the thing outran Russian SAMS

Now Skunk works is in what used to be called Building 85, I believe. That's where they built the TriStar and some components of the C-5 B small among other projects like the P3, AWAKS

Everyone can stop researching, this is solid.

@@EdWeibe I don't know at what point but AA missiles achieved MACH 7+. It's possible that even at that speed they might miss, unless stealth enough the plane wouldn't detect them in time, if flying high enough and limited range of the missiles.

@@uncrunch398 yes a SAM would eventually catch up. but keep in mind they were designed to shoot down jets going MAYBE Mach 1.5 at the time. so a SAM trying to catch a plane going a "possible:" MACH 3.3 or faster means even if the SAM is catching up it would probably run out of fuel before it got close to the SR-71.

Mach 1 I a single SONIC BOOM for Mach 2 it is a BOOM BOOM for a double Mach triple is yes 3 booms in quick succession. USAF 1986 thru 1993, McConnell AFB KS and Edwards AFB CA. With stinst all over & undisclosed clearances 😊 I was one of two people to help in decommissioning of last active SR-71 in 1992ish (memory) they transferred 2 or 3 of them to NASA for high altitude testing. Somewhere I have a B/W pic with the other individual infront of the bird we decommissioned. Was one of the first digital cameras & about the size of a home VHS camcorder 😂😂😂

@@markmatt9174 Uh, where did you get that from? Generally you get a shockwave off the nose of the plane, off the leading edges of the wings, and off the trailing edges of the wings and tails. WIth the shockwaves producing an overpressure, then underpressure, you end up with the underpressure causing the shockwaves to coalesce into a bow shock and a tail-shock and you get either one loud bang or two loud bangs depending on the size of the plane (the length of the plane and the speed at which the two shockwaves pass you by).

@@markmatt9174 WHAT????

USAF museum is better than any other

@@jacobstienecker that sounds really cool.

​@@jacobstieneckerhow many weather balloons do they have on display?

@@American-Motors-Corporationjust the wreckage of one with characters written in Mandarin I’d suspect!

@@Nerple lol

I wonder how many times the sr 71 triggered ballistic missle warnings? Lol

Tard Nation

I would have liked to see the radar operators reaction when Shul came out of Libya ... " What your tracking there sailor is Freedom "

My bullshitometer is peaking at your claim.

​@@dananorth895 it actually had a radar recorder, because it would trigger radars and could record data so they could understand the rival country's radars better

They were stationed at RAF Mildenhall not Lakenheath. The F111s were stationed at Lakenheath. I spent a year supporting one of the SR71 payload systems from 1987 to 1988. We lived in West Row which was right next to the Mildenhall flightline.

they were based at Mildenhall, though only on temporary assignment in '82, they did operate out of Lakenheath during the 80s, when the runway at Mildenhall wasnt available for use, but as the RAF found out with flights to the Falklands, youd need a whole fleet of KC135s flying over the south atlantic and fuelling each other just to stay there, for any plane, let alone the SR71 to get there and back, its a 16,000 mile round trip.

Is Morris code anything like Morse code? 😊

Exactly what I've stated. If the F-15 can do Mach 2.5 then there's no question this Skunkworks creation was made to fly MUCH faster.

That would be about Mach 3.9...?

Bob Gilliland told my son ...it was much faster than advertised.

Back in 1988, your girlfriend was a security risk!

scary meaning they were not sure the airframe could take it

Not only that, 3.2 isn't fast enough to outrun a SAM! IIRC, they'll easily do Mach 4.

@@markymarknj Common soviet SAMS of the time capable of high altitude interceptions could reach mach 3.5-4 but they can't sustain that sort of speed particularly when trying to hit something at high altitude. They've only got so much fuel onboard and once it's burned then you're just relying on momentum to carry you to your target, if that target is sustaining high altitude flight at mach 3+ then unless you get very lucky with your timing there's a very low chance of hitting anything

Was that with Maury Rosenburg ?

@@tonyhowell9203 I think it could be! It was so long ago I can't remember exactly, but having a look at Maury Rosenburg, he definitely looks familiar.

Have seen and touched the same aircraft. Smaller than I thought.

The F-22 top speed must be absurd, and we all know that F-35 isn't mach 1.6.

@@MrGriff305 I was an F-16A FCF pilot. The jet had to go at least mach 1.4 at 40,000 ft. Fastest I ever saw was 1.84. I suspect the F-22 is 2.5ish.

@@MrGriff305 F-35 speed is 1.6 as they tow it back into the hangar for more repair

​@@Ghost_Bear_Trader Yeah, while it's being dragged on it's belly and the pilot is still in his ejection seat 40 feet over yelling at the tow truck 🚒, "hey don't forget me! Take the whole chair, I'll just stay strapped in, I got some power bars, yee-haw! I wanna' do that again!"

@@superdude1759 lol

President Johnson publicly announced the SR-71 in July 1964 and gave basic performance details of altitudes over 80,000 feet and speeds over 2000 MPH. The USAF publicly unveiled the A-11/YF-12A in October 1964, even going so far as to fly two of the planes over the runway at altitudes as low as 75 feet AGL, though maintaining subsonic speeds during the demos. The SR-71 had some secrecy around it still, but it was not the black project level of secrecy that you describe.

@@JarrodFratesI saw a B-2 land at our local ANG for its state name designation ceremony, probably around 1996ish. If the SR-71 was similar, it wasn't secret, but it was secure. State police on the adjoining roads, strict security into and out of the airport, and it was parked in a C-5 hanger immediately.

@@JarrodFrates The "black project level of secrecy" was in force for the CIA A-12.

😂 can you imagine working on a f-111 and a sr-71 rolls into the hanger one day. They're like yeah we just flew around the world, but we needed to stop here. I need to call my boss where's the closest secured line?

I like it 😊

It makes me wonder what’s being made today😅

​@@ow7224or what's out there already that we are unaware of.

Yep technically is so much better now ! No way we don’t have much faster equipment !

"...unbelievable tech from Kelly Johnson and all the dedicated engineers who produced this masterpiece"...WITH SLIDE RULES! No computers or CAD.

​@@ow7224 TR3b

Such a great story ✋👨‍🚀 thank you for sharing!!

@@chris_jorge Your welcome! Happy to!

I heard from a Vietnam-era AF radar guy that the 71 did 3500 on his scope. And they had to get read in to monitor before the 71 flew through SE Asia.

@@FUTURECONFLICTCHANNEL Wow! That would be Mach 5.37! Other commenters in this post were saying that as well and a couple were saying it could fly as fast as 6 to 7,000mph! Have you heard of the X35 (I think)? It was the lifting body aircraft developed back in 2005 to 2010 or thereabouts that was achieving 12 to 13,000mph with a new engine called a SCRAM jet. That stands for Supersonic Combustion Ramjet. Interestingly enough that aircraft could take the heat. Also even in the 1960's the Atlas rockets could take the heat generated at 17,000mph which is their entry into orbit speed. I say this because thermal limits are always mentioned about the 71. I'm not so sure that's an actual issue!

I would not question for a second whether the SR-71 is / was Mach 5 capable. The issue really is the fact that the poor bird has to take off. If the airframe was dropped at 30k feet and 300-450 mph, the restrictors which allow its power plant to go dual mode would be lifted and it could likely maintain stability well past five fingers. It's all about compressor stall. For the time, the intake design is an absolute amazing breakthrough. That was how many decades ago? Dual-mode means compromises. Maybe there's a "third mode" setting no one every admitted to already built in. (Likely would have been in the mid 80s.) I'm guessing the last 5 were tested and capable of blowing past at least 3.8 without mods, with a freshly designed 25 years newer inlet system? nothing wrong with the airframe going for more sky.

I believe that to a point. There's a quote from Kelly Johnson's engineers out there stating that each time the titanium airframe went up it retempered and further hardened the metal. Not sure what that would do for speed, but I could imagine it would allow "seat feel" to push a little futher as shakes, wobbles, and squeeks would change.

This is true from the accounts I've heard as well.

I've heard this for years. In an article about the SR-71 in an aviation magazine, a pilot said that it was never flown at full power but could reach in excess of 2500 MPH.

@@paulmartos7730 There's a few interviews of A-12 drivers saying they flew wide open over their targets.

@@hoghogwild if you were over a Russian SAM site photographing it, that might have been a great idea.

Decals? Legend has it the SR-71 was too hot for sealants and would leak fuel like a sieve on a cold start. It was only after warming up that thermal expansion of the skins would close them up and so they would take most of their fueling in-flight

@@ExaltedDuckthat is true,the plane had to be assembled so it was loose fitting-the friction of high speed flight would close the gaps between each piece.If it wasn’t,the plane would literally break apart from the expansion while in great speed.That’s the same reason bridges have expansion joints,to allow expansion and contraction due heat and cold temps.

Sshhh.....

It’s the kind of thing of whether the plane fly faster more than once. Mach 3+ in the MiG-25 was possible if the engines were expendable.

He probably pulled that out his butt. You really think it was tested to the point of failure?

Design limit within safety regs? Sure...But ABLE to achieve....Prob substantially more. I tend to believe the "Just under 3k" stories.....For seconds at a time.

this is objectively correct, it's limited by the autoignition point of the specific fuel they used under the plane's skin.

The speed of the A12 was limited by the air temperature at the compressor inlet of the engines.

my dad (a master tool and die maker) made the pitot tube for the X15 at JPL .He also welded on the X15 inside a giant tent filled with Argon or Helium. In the early 60's welding titanium was done that way and he wore a suit like a deep sea diver might use with oxygen hose for breathing..

This is why they had to sit on the ground and let the plane cool off before the pilot and tech officer could get out.

especially when remembering its really late 50s technology.

Could you link me to what the CIA did for the materials?

@@babyj4154the CIA formed shell companies and bought the titanium mineral from of all places,the country the SR71 was built to spy upon,the USSR.Titanium was only found in the Ukraine,which in those days was firmly entrenched behind the iron curtain of the USSR.There are numerous accounts on KZfaq that recount that fact.

@@babyj4154-KZfaq has several channels explaining what the CIA did to acquire the needed metals.I would suggest typing in the SR71 plus CIA assistance.That should do it.👌👍

A few years ago, I was at 39000 feet flying north off the coast of GA/SC. I looked above and to my left to the west. What I thought would be a meteorite falling into the atmosphere, white/greenish trail, that ends up falling, burning out, ended up not descending, and continued to burn, heading east out to the ocean. ATC didn't see anything on the radar. It was traveling quite fast, but hard to determine height. I asked my FO, who was a former F15 pilot, if he had ever seen anything like that. He hadn't. My logical conclusion is our government has some really impressive undisclosed aircraft.

You are correct.@@sennaha

Hey thank you for sharing this! This confirms what I've heard about the SR-71. Wow one of the actual designers! That's Amazing! Also I just heard something on the History channel about how the German (probably Jewish) scientists under the Nazis developed anti gravity drive then we, the US sequestered these scientists after WWII who helped develop our space program. I think a few of those scientists went to Groom Lake, NV!

Russian su-57 flies mach 6.5 dont ya know. Its so stealth that no one has ever seen one fly over ukraine. Has a height ceiling of 95,000 ft. It even has a gun that goes pew pew pew

RF is not ethnically Slavic. Most moscovians aren't even ethnically Slavic...but we know what you meant. They like to pretend about much more than aircraft specs...

​@@DaneKaiser-- just a few days ago they got a '57 off the ground to drop some big bomb on a Ukrainian target. It was "escorted" by a pair of '35s, and the big bomb it dropped missed and made a hole in an empty field.

@@DaneKaiser Does it still have engines that go "crunch crunch" though?

@@lordphullautosear are you sure the 2 su-35’s weren't towing the 57? ,😂 that's good info though thank you.I'm pretty surprised that they actually flew a 57 over Ukrainian soil. They are deathly afraid of getting one of those shot down. They only have 7 partly operational 57's flying right? They've built 9 total but 2 are just for testing or prototypes

I think this is true! See my comment about an in flight refueler on main page.

the TS requirements never go away.

True, but he never gave a top speed. Just a nod when we gave a speed. Higher. Much higher.

My friend retired from Houston Center was there when they got that call.

Now, this post is more believable than most of the others... SR 71 engines were ram jets. Ram jets...the faster it goes, the faster it wants to go... It makes all the sense in the world that its top speed was never really known!!! BTW,the original designator for the blackbird was RS 71... Lyndon Johnson turned the letters around when he first announced the aircraft!!! Top speed was never determined...

@@philhand5830 They weren't actually ramjets since all the inlet air goes through the first few stages of compression before some of it bypassing around the engine core and going off to the afterburners. Ramjets don't have any compressors. It's really a type of turbofan.

Yeah Ive always figured the top speed was 'structural failute due to hull melting'.

@@BooBaddyBig Pratt & Whitney J58. they where ramjets but also turbo fans in a hybrid setup. at low speeds the spike is extended and and trust comes from the turbofan. at high speed the engine spike ( the cone at the front of the engine) is retracted the suck in doors to the turbo fan are closed as well as the tertia doors being closed. all trust came from the ram jet part of the engine. And the turbo fan only provided a cool air barrior to keep the burning fuel from melting the engine casing, and in some models at vary high speeds Water/methanol was injected to provide cooling.

@@natlkjh8677 OK, I've got it now. No, not really. You need to understand that there's TWO sets of bypass. The first set is used at all speeds, and is cooling air from right after the inlet, and goes completely past the engine and all the little pipes and straight into the nozzle, bypassing the afterburner and isn't directly reheated and so isn't really a ramjet (except it may mix and burn with the other flows within the nozzle a bit.) The second comes off after the compressor in six big tubes and is variable and goes into the afterburner section. That's just an afterburning turbofan.

I do remember hearing somewhere that a submerged submarine could hold pace with an aircraft carrier which is pretty impressive.

That was a true statement.

That made me laugh... Because of the way you said it and because I believe it's true! Thank you!

@@superdude1759 I go every year and the sr71 is my favorite plane. I try to talk with the pilots if they are there everytime

Was the footage of the SR-71 at the end of this video cruising low past Dulles Airport (@10:14) taken on that day? That was a surprise to me when it popped up ... and very COOL!!

I lived in California at the time and heard the sonic boom.

@@johnfalcon84 it was in the early 90s sometime. It took off about 20 miles from my house. 🤘

Could be. Don't really care. It's definitely within speeds the thing is said to fly.

@@SelfEvident It absolutely did happen

The fuel leak wasn't really that major an issue: JP-7 could take a 400-500 degrees before igniting and the airframe would seal up as it expanded at speed. The leaking would stop at that point and the airflow would just blow off all the fuel that already leaked. As long as you didn't get to the auto-ignition temperature before that happened, there'd be little problem. The fact that the plane isn't power-limited would ultimately be the issue: Temperature would ultimately push some component past it's critical limit.

@@petero.7487 They would take off, reach Mach 3, back off, take on fuel and bleed off the excess O2 in the fuel tanks while capping the headspace in the tanks with nitrogen to avoid auto ignition of the fuel in the wings while operating at high speeds and temperatures. The plane leaked because it was designed to stretch in flight from heat expansion. That expansion in length was about 6 inches.

Yeah this was on of Kelly's amazing successes for sure. But he has a whole lineage of planes that will make his legend continue for quite some time.

The secrecy has nothing to do with Johnson.

whatever@@SgtSteel1

OK, FYI.... I Was also at KAB 1977-1982 TDY, AND PCS 1985-1988

Got there just after you left. 89-91. PCS'd to Minot. One of my better assignments. If I had to rank my assignments ... 1. Clark AB, PI; 2. Kadena, OK; 3. Minot AFB, ND; 4. RAF Welford, UK, 5. Nellis AFB, NV, 6. Kunsan AB, ROK; and 7. Cannon AFB, NM.

@clarenceobert5860 Kool. I was wondering if I would get a reply. Thank you! A lot of people don't know this but, it was the tanker Navs that ran ALL of the air refueling rendezvous...I never missed an A/R... Oh boy, do I have a lot of stories. The best one is when in the late 1970s the SR flew round trip out of Beale and return, he flew about a 12 hour sortie that day!! I believe that was the longest mission the sled flew.....Anybody out there know of any others? Thanks for the reply.

I worked the navigation system on the HABU for ten years. I was TDY to Kadena in 76, 77 &78, PCS 79-83.

​@@user-fs3um5vq1t during 6 days war in 73 a BB came to my base on east coast... it was secretly housed in old WWII hanger... it would fly over Israel and neighboring areas for obvious reasons... it would depart before sunup and not return until after dark... so, figure daylight in Oct and then you'll know how much flying time was envolved...

On a ship in the Navy, a Colonel is called Captain. The Navy doesn't have any Colonels.

You seem to be using the speed of sound at sea-level: The speed of sound is affected by air-temperature and from 11000-20000m (36089' to 65617') the speed of sound is around 660.1 mph (573.6 kn.) and that would correspond to around 4.54 Mach. I don't know what the air temperature is above that altitude. I remember hearing something about the inlet and ejectors producing "thrust", but I'm not so sure if that actually meant the inlet was "sucking" the plane forward or merely driving up overall thrust by compressing air (which increased the overall thrust of the engine), and the ejectors were increasing performance by more efficiently driving up the speed of the exhaust. Regardless, the aircraft didn't appear to be power limited, so in effect the plane would accelerate to destruction if allowed to. It isn't the first plane to have this characteristic: The B-58 also fit this profile as well, though it was a bit slower.

It expanded in flight. Not stretched. Js

@@petero.7487 Low pressure in front of that engine does produce a sucking effect like the low pressure above the wing gives lift. Sucking…for lack of a better word. Like something moving in space with no pressure. It it’s moving, it will continue unless something interferes with it. So it’s not generating pull but there’s nothing in front of it to stop it. That’s the best explanation I can come up with. And yes altitude and temperature play a big part in Mach speed. I just wasn’t going to try to be all technical on a TY post, but you are correct!!

@@comradeeverclear4063 Means the same to me, sort of. But yes, it expands with the heat and friction. I got to meet Chuck Yeager at the aero club on Travis AFB in the late 80s once. He had some wild stories and he used the word, stretch, a few times when talking about breaking the speed of sound. He was so down to earth. But the bravery that man had…balls of steel. 🤣

An SR pilot personally told me the same thing. They once flew into China to get a sample of nuclear bomb test. The bomb detonated, they entered China airspace, got the sample from the test being conducted in the middle of China and departed the other side, west to east. They were pinged 1 time by radar as they exited the air space. Flight time roughly 28 minutes. That would indicate a forward air speed of at least Mach 6 or 7. Sounds fantastic and impossible to me. But that's what i was told by an actual pilot.

@@Ghost_Bear_Trader I don't doubt that story not for 1 minute. Or no more than I doubt the story I told you. He told me that in 1977.

Wow! I believe this! See my comment above about a boom operators story! You'll like it!

There is only so much a compression chamber can withstand pressure will become so great the heat will melt the containment.

@spikenomoon you do know that the engines on the SR-71 were hybrid engines and, at minimum, 30 years ahead of their time. As a matter of fact, the compression chambers of those engines are the ancestors of the chambers Elon Musk uses on his Falcon 9 rockets. This is why those rockets can push out so much force at half the power output required of those used by Blue Origin, ULA, Russia, China, and other space agencies around the world.

The A-12 has it's record breaking also but out of respect I'm quit sure that's Classified.

Or the pilot was just fkng around. You think any might have ever said “proceeding to warp speed” as a corny joke? I’d say everyone would know he was kidding, but after reading a bunch of these total bs comments, now I’m not so sure about that.

An SR71 pilot once told me "At night, Mach 5 looks like a shooting star" I asked how he knew. "Because I was the one flying it."

Wow, "cynic" much? Just curious, what qualifies you to state that "all these comments are BS?"

I knew an AP who was in good with some of the SR-71 aircrew and maintenance personnel during the Vietnam era; he said they were always over 3.8 and quite a few were well north of 4 (4.2-4.5; idre). They used a special paint on the inside of the airframe that changed color according to temperature; correlated to speed, it gave the maintainers & reviewers indisputable evidence - not that a SR-71 crew would ever “sandbag.”

Had a Navy ATC buddy who talked with a 71 pilot and admitted that they were able to bump it upwards of 5.0.........very believable........@@wireflight

@@tedhursh7672 Complete BS

complete bullshit

The pilots always said that the SR-71 could go faster than it needed to go.

​@@TykeMison_Obviously you have never seen it happen.

​@@TykeMison_American Airlines used to take off in the same manner.

SR71's couldn't lift their noses anywhere near vertical on take off or they'd break right where it's neck meets the wings according to the pilots, I forget what their limit was the pilots say in interviews but as I recall it wasn't even 45°. And they didn't get to the end of the runway and leave immediately, it took at the minimum 2 minutes of them sitting there for the pilot and back seater to do what they had to do and for the celestial navigation system to lock onto the 3 stars it was programmed to use as reference points for that particular mission, even in broad daylight it could see them, they didn't hang out at the end of the runway for too long but it took them at least that amount of time to get ready. As far as this click bait video goes the SR71 couldn't fly "much faster" than what the Air Force admits, first off there's no reason for them to lie about an aircraft that's retired and will never fly again, and the guy's who flew them have all been cleared to talk about it's performance parameters by the Air Force, the only thing they don't want them talking about it's electronic warfare capabilities since some of the equipment is still used in the U2 which continues to operate, but when it comes to how high, how fast and everything else in that regard they're allowed to say anything they know, and they'll all tell you that the listed speed is considered it's top speed, it's capable of flying faster but not by much and there's no real reason to do it plus any pilot who did so would probably lose his job because of all the additional maintenance and most likely engine replacement that would be a result of doing so, at it's listed top speed which is where they flew their mission's the metallurgy of the engine's is designed to handle the heat, any faster and the heat increases to the point where the aircraft would have to be taken out of the flight rotation schedule due to all the different inspections that'd be required from getting the engine's that hot, another aircraft and it's crew would have to be brought in from another base that houses them to cover for that one, the list of headaches and problems from doing it would cause heartburn with all the wrong people and it'd be the last time that crew saw the inside of one for the rest of their lives, also the way speed is measured with aircraft any speed an SR would have hit in a nose down attitude doesn't count. As pointed out by the creator of this video which also shows that it's title is malarkey the small amount of speed over it's listed top speed that a few SR's are rumored to have hit certainly isn't "much faster" than what's listed so all the hoopla over it is just dumb and pointless, it's not like it can actually go mach 4.7 which would be something worth getting excited over and would prove they were hiding something about it, people's imaginations just go crazy over those things and there's no point behind it, there's no secrets about it, it's a retired aircraft that the Air Force and the pilots who flew it have given full disclosure about it's performance, there are no secrets about it with the exception of it's electronic warfare capabilities the Air Force doesn't want talked about because they're still in use, and no one cares about it anyway, top speeds of aircraft are no longer an issue, China, Russia and no one else cares about anything like that which is why all the hubbub over someone at Boeing accidentally misspeaking about the F15's top speed is just silly, stealth capabilities and weapons capabilities are what they're concerned over, our potential enemies could care less whether or not the F15 can actually fly 200 MPH faster than what's listed, the only people it keeps awake at night is aviation fanboys and their vivid imaginations.

Not that it will burst your bubble too much - but the airframe on display in Huntsville is actually not an SR-71, it's an A-12 - which in my opinion is a better aircraft though less popularized. That particular ship is airframe #7 of 12 built for the CIA. I also agree it's a beautful machine up close!

​@@LukeLewisThanks, my mistake

@@larry3064 no mistake had - was just letting you know, lots of people don't realize it!

Nice story about going to Norway for lunch, but slightly incredible, just take a glance at the time zones.

@@apveening Actually not so amazing. Depending on hoe fast they fly. Flying over the north pole. What time he left in the morning he could have lunch and then return. Remember they fly up and over the pole not going straight around the world.

@@Bob-fk8vd I was already assuming shortest/fastest route. But breakfast time in California is already past lunch time in Norway. The time difference is nine hours.

@@apveening I think it’s more like this: He was leaving home that morning and would be over Norway during lunch, California time. For example, as a crow flies (or as it happens, a blackbird in this case?), Helsinki is about 5600 hundred miles from LA. At an avg speed of 2200mph, that’s about five hours round-trip. Let’s add +1hr to decelerate and refuel a few times. +1.5hrs to get to the airfield, brief, preflight checks +1.5hrs to land, disembark, debrief and drive home. (My durations are a guess but seem reasonable for a plane and mission with dedicated resources to maintain rapid response readiness) That’s just 9 hours - if you have breakfast and leave home at 9am, you’re eating your lunch over Norway at around 1pm California time, and home by 6 PM for family dinner. Even if we spend an extra hour flying over Norway, we’re still home by 7pm for pot roast.

I believe this is true! See my comment above on main page! Was that ORU or Rhema that you went to!

Your friend was on crack.

Your friend has a big mouth and apparently so do you. How much of this is still classified and why don't you care?

Your friend probably told you it's top speed over shorter runs.

SAMs can travel up to Mach 3.5

@@Ghost_Bear_Trader In this context though "out ran the missile" doesn't necessarily mean they went faster. It just means that the missile couldn't close the distance before it ran out of fuel.

@@robertkesselring SAMs were closing. Blackbird matched speed then pulled away. SAMs falling further behind eventually ran out of fuel after a few moments. Look around on KZfaq. The video is here somewhere.

I think that happened with North Korea as well. The KPA (North Korean army) fired a missile at it, so the pilot just throttled up until the missile went off course or ran out of fuel. It's understandable why this plane just drove the Commie Bloc CRAZY.

approx 6400 mph - thats classified

I also expect the Blackbird's speed to be incredibly fast, but I found a mistake in your calculations. 3000 knots is equal to about Mach 4.5 3500 knots is equal to about Mach 5.25 3500 miles/h is equal to about M 4.56

Don't forget Mach speed is a function of air density. At typical conditions, Mach 1 ground speed at 60,000 ft is about 86.7% of the ground speed of Mach 1 at 0 ft.

I can vividly picture the scene!

Hilarious! THANK YOU for that... Still laughing! How did all of these funny people and up commenting of the SR-71?

You just exactly described a scene in "Top Gun: Maverick."

Possible but I have my doubts but if so then that Aircraft would be in SPACE.

@@craigbosko2229 Not quite. Mach 8.9 is 6800 MPH but 18,000 MPH (Mach 23.5) is required to achieve orbit.

I question the veracity of that claim. A google search of NASA's hypersonic wind tunnels doesn't show anything with a capability over Mach 10.

You know that a person is fibbing when they start off with "a relative..... or a friend of a friend of a friend....said.

​@@RobertR3750 And you believe Google ?

@@paulreid2223 Google didn't say it. NASA did. Do you have any verified source that shows NASA is lying?

They did have a 20" tunnel, but that wasn't to Mach 20.

An SR pilot told me "Mach 5 at night looks like a shooting star" when I asked how did he know, "Because I was the one flying it"

120k. Fixed it for you.

3300 kts. not possible. Maps with straight lines are not accurate routes. You needed to calculate for a Great Circle route.

Are you sayin the sr71 cought up with a shuttle moving at mach 5?

@@everettstormy Can you name any other aircraft that was avable then?

@@Alphqwe I don't think it's possible for an s12/71 to go Mach 5

@@everettstormy all I can is what I heard.

@@Alphqwe your English is terrible. I'm sorry if it's not your first language but I assume your American if you have old sr71 and space shuttle stories