Thread

NASA asked several former SR-71A staffers to help secret restart

327 points · 403 comments · ilamont

Centigonal · 1790730865 · focus · HN ↗
This feels like the steam catapault kerfuffle from earlier this year. Maybe I'm missing some vital reason these retired technologies must be revived, but it's not inspiring when our military doctrine is "let's go back to what worked 60 years ago"
1. walrus01 · 1790730995 · focus · HN ↗
  Don't forget the new 'Battleship'. You should have seen the looks on the faces of some of the DoD people when they trotted out the big CGI rendered posterboard of the thing. They know it's a boondoggle and they're kicking the can down the road.
  <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump-class_battleship" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump-class_battleship
  1. collabs · 1790748790 · focus · HN ↗
    Yes, like the graphic at the top shows multiple rockets launching simultaneously from the ship. Is this even something that came from what the navy needs or is it just an ego trip?
  2. FlowingRiver · 1790751203 · focus · HN ↗
    He just has to put his name on everything doesn't he?
    I mean, Obamacare was just the nick name for the Affordable care act, but Don actively just has to have it put up there.
    saalweachter · 1790768282 · focus · HN ↗
    Obamacare was the branding by the ACA's enemies, both to try to make it less popular and tie the President to its unpopularity.
    Tangurena2 · 1790792189 · focus · HN ↗
    It was amusing to watch videos of people denouncing Obamacare while demanding politicians "keep their hands of my ACA".
  3. mrguyorama · 1790781535 · focus · HN ↗
    This is shit we used to make fun of the USSR for doing. We are the USSR during the gerontocracy phase right now.
2. UberFly · 1790745134 · focus · HN ↗
  My speculation level is at full but the SR-71 program was the gold standard and I think it's good to tap those responsible for it. They were doing some incredible stuff 60 short years ago and dismissing it as "old" is folly.
  1. elil17 · 1790764756 · focus · HN ↗
    The SR-71 wasn't randomly retired, though. The tactical need to go really fast at a high altitude disappeared because you can now get the same intel from satellites and stealth aircraft. The real question is why do you suddenly need that capability again?
    fragmede · 1790773861 · focus · HN ↗
    Planning for the possibility that access to space may become denied, and wanting a backup option. If the enemy takes out your spy satellite, how else are you going to get photos of the warzone?
    andruby · 1790878126 · focus · HN ↗
    Even in that case, cheap and unmanned would be much more cost efficient.
    The SR-71 was uncontested in the 70'ies, but it wouldn't be today. Today it would be vulnerable. Missiles reach higher and fly faster. There are missiles that are designed to intercept ICBM's, which come in faster than a Mach-3 SR-71.
    Radar detection, tracking and firing has also become much more effective in the last 60 years.
  2. [deleted] · 1790767358 · focus · HN ↗
    [deleted]
  3. greedo · 1790783634 · focus · HN ↗
    Those responsible are mostly dead...
3. drtz · 1790775645 · focus · HN ↗
  Making a single SR-71A airworthy again is likely not the goal. The tactical need for it is no longer there and a single working aircraft doesn't add much.
  Rebuilding the institutional knowledge for future supersonic / hypersonic projects, on the other hand, seems like a worthwhile target.
4. wat10000 · 1790787513 · focus · HN ↗
  It’s not just military, the whole administration is based on going back decades: medicine, economics, pollution, women’s rights.
5. playa1 · 1790797890 · focus · HN ↗
  My guess this started as a misunderstanding and nobody wants to admit it.
  Like Four Seasons Total Landscaping or Tools For Humanity and Bruno Mars.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.