FT SR-71 or FT Blackbird

[short_nathan]

I agree with @Mr Man with the SR-71 thing. BUT it shouldn't be called FT SR-71, it would be called FT Blackbird, Right?

 

[bisco]

right!

 

[LitterBug]

Oh, I WANT AN A-12 OXCART!!!!

 

[Mr Man]

I agree.

 

[Mr Man]

Tomato tomoto

 

[LitterBug]

There are quite a few differences! Which is this???

 

[Flying Cherokee]

Sr71’s are cool and all…..but come on the U2!

 

[Mr Man]

There are quite a few differences! Which is this???

View attachment 246844
View attachment 246846

A-12, blackbird had different canopy.

 

[LitterBug]

A-12, blackbird had different canopy.

Nope, that was an SR71. Dual cockpit for passenger.
A-12 had fins dropping down from the bottom as well.
A-12 is L-O-N-G-E-R

 

[Mr Man]

Nope, that was an SR71. Dual cockpit for passenger.
A-12 had fins dropping down from the bottom as well.
A-12 is L-O-N-G-E-R

Got it, better do more research.😂. I still think the sr-71 looks better with the shorter fuselage.

 

[Mr Man]

If you want to call it that. (I mean fuselage)

 

[Piotrsko]

Hmmm Palmdale, driving down 14 and getting buzzed by odd assorted secret whazzdat takeoffs.

people who know said an engine out was was difficult to restart after being pinned against the opposite side of the cockpit. Hence the dorsals. You'll note that proper ones have full flying rudders which will allow sideways flight

 

[quorneng]

Doesn't matter which.
You will still have the intake cone size problem if it is to be powered by EDFs unless you have "fake" cones or use enormous cheat holes....yuk!

 

[LitterBug]

Doesn't matter which.
You will still have the intake cone size problem if it is to be powered by EDFs unless you have "fake" cones or use enormous cheat holes....yuk!

The real one uses cheat holes at low speed to get more air behind the cone.....

 

[quorneng]

Yes but they are far too small to adequately feed an EDF in conjunction with the limited cone inlet area.
It seems to be overlooked that cheat holes although convenient are not a particularly efficient way to add air to an EDF inlet duct

 

[Mr Man]

That’s what e-Flite did.

 

[short_nathan]

Then make a Prop version, it would be by far easier to fly.

 

[short_nathan]

Hey, I just designed and built one!

 

[short_nathan]

But I will redesign it pretty soon. OCD strikes me just from seeing it (the wings are too small and the Engine is too big)🫣

 

[Piotrsko]

Reason the cones are there was the original design engine had sort of somewhat subsonic air intake requirements. Things get stupid at mach 4+ so they stayed. People that I knew that flew these said a relight every so often was a mandatory flight requirement. A no relight flight was akin to a smooth no bounce landing: once every once in a while is great, after the third one, you are tempting fate to smite you.
You don't need a cone, just a profile triangle would suffice for looks. If they wings are too small then you just need more thrust