Quote:
Originally Posted by wild_weasel
I don't want to be doing Mach 3 and be close enough to terra firma to use TF.
My point was: you have to slow down to drop stuff, way down, and THAT'S where a big fat missile twice as fast as you has its shot. If your boiling air at Mach 3 (and it does BOIL the air as it comes out of the nozzle by the way)...SAMs are just big fireworks, especially with ECM and a little maneuvering.
I LOVE the SR-71 and I think it would easily survive today, they even had plans to put missiles and stuff on those things, but there's a reason why they didn't. Metallurgy, guidance, and aerodynamics are only so flexible at those speeds.
Point taken on the altitude issue. Going fast enough to make MANPADS useless and being low enough to make SAMs useless has its merits. The B-1 was really supposed to do that type mission. And F-16 guys practice something similar even though they won't actually do it in combat. F-15Es could, they are great at interdiction, but nowadays, why risk the lives of pilots and crew and a multi-million or billion dollar aircraft to do what a cruise missile already does and was, from inception, designed for?
I hate UAVs as much as the next guy, and i want to fly low and fast and blow stuff up like the next guy, but I'm also an engineer. Hence, I look at things from the perspective of form follows function. The XB-70 was kind of the next iteration of the idea of the B-58 Hustler (which had a fatal pitch mode by the way, killed several pilots. I think it was due to Mach tuck but I can't remember). Making FAST bombers is a really tough thing to design for. Fast bombers are getting left in the dust for stealth bombers, "who needs speed when you can't be seen?" sort of thinking. I think they still have a place, and I hope haul-ass bomb haulers stay, but its a tough spec to design to.
|
I can't go into a lot of details but B-1's still do TF. It's designed to save the plane if something with TF goes wrong. and with the Avionics that planes have now adays they know when they are being targeted and can tell you where it's coming from long before they ever launch which gives pilots the ability to either jam, convince the missle it's somewhere else, or book it out of there. to say everything is going to stealth. . .yea and no. if you can see a B-2 you can shoot it down. sorry stealth is good but not the best. Speed with stealth is even better. The B-1b has a smaller radar cross section do to some stealth features installed after learning from the B-1A program. Your comment about fast bombers getting left in the dust is totally inaccurate. right now the B-1b is the bomber of choice in both wars due to payload, speed, and time on station. and the B-3 is suppose to be faster then the B-2 and carry more all while being a complete stealth plane. BUT, that's only if UCAVs don't take over before the next bomber is built. I hate the fact that UAVs and UCAVs are taking over but it's the way of the future. they can handle more G's then a human and loss of life isn't as high of a risk.
SR-71 wad designed with Stealth but it's heat plum really does away with that. lol.