Slashdot Mirror


Lockheed Martin Developing Successor To the SR-71 Blackbird

Zothecula writes "When the last SR-71 Blackbird was grounded in 1998 it was a double blow. Not only did aviation lose one of the most advanced aircraft ever built, but also one of the most beautiful. Lockheed Martin's Skunk Works has now revealed that it is building a successor to the Blackbird: the SR-72. Using a new hypersonic engine design that combines turbines and ramjets, the company says that the unmanned SR-72 will be twice as fast as its predecessor with a cruising speed of Mach 6."

10 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. Faster then a speeding dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    http://tech.slashdot.org/story/13/11/01/1911249/skunk-works-reveals-proposed-sr-71-successor-the-hypersonic-sr-72

    Don't worry samzenpus - you're not as bad as timothy.

  2. Re:this possibly means one of two things.. by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 3, Interesting

    This is a correct assumption.

    Basically, the automatic cutbacks coming up mean all military spending will be cut in half.

    All of it.

    Lockheed Martin (which I used to own, and even bought and sold option in - yes, made tons of cash) has frequently had the Cheneys on their board, and other individuals determined to drag the US into the Two Permanent Wars Always era, when the correct response is to end overseas wars of foreign aggression and let the Middle East rot.

    Solve that and there is no budget deficit.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  3. Granted, it's a cool plane... by sootman · · Score: 3, Insightful
    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  4. Re:this possibly means one of two things.. by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I agree, I wish they would just take the military budget for Air Conditioning and give it directly to NASA. it would triple our space research funding.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  5. Re:this possibly means one of two things.. by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I agree, I wish they would just take the military budget for Air Conditioning and give it directly to NASA. it would triple our space research funding.

    As a former soldier, I don't want them to cut funding for air conditioning. Operating in climates with 120 F for months at a time is pretty hard, and the computers and equipment starts failing.

    But I get your point.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  6. Re:this possibly means one of two things.. by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Cutting anything just to cut is stupid. DO you think just random cutting will get rid of pork? It will not, pork is always the last to go.
    What we need is targeted and precise cuts on a project basis.

    But no, lets just leave all our allies dangling, and leave our defense wide open. Cause that's what happens when you just slash and burn.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  7. Re:this possibly means one of two things.. by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the correct response is to end overseas wars of foreign aggression and let the Middle East rot.

    Are you a parent? Many parents intervene to stop their kids from squabbling, and think they are reducing conflict. But if they just stay out of it, the kids will figure out how to resolve the conflicts on their own. Their resolution may not be what you, as a parent, would have imposed, but it is still an end to the conflict.

    The same would likely happen in the Middle East. If we were no longer there to impose our will, the squabbling would likely stop as the countries in the region realized that they really had to deal directly with each other, and had to live with the consequences of their actions.

    American power is not the solution to the Middle East's problems. To a large extent, it is the cause of the problems.

  8. Re:this possibly means one of two things.. by ArcherB · · Score: 4, Funny

    =As a former soldier, I don't want them to cut funding for air conditioning. Operating in climates with 120 F for months at a time is pretty hard, and the computers and equipment starts failing.

    If US soldiers were not deployed in places they have no business being in the
    first place, the need for air conditioning would drop drastically.

    You mean places like California?

    --
    There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  9. Re:this possibly means one of two things.. by mrchaotica · · Score: 3

    Maybe our allies should start picking up their portion of their defense tab rather than relying on the U.S. taxpayer to constantly foot the bill.

    Aren't some of them -- namely, the ones like Japan and Germany which double as our defeated foes -- mostly disallowed from having their own military by treaty?

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  10. Re:this possibly means one of two things.. by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Funny

    We dont need a war in california. Yes I disagree with everything California stands for but that is no reason to go to war there.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.