Thread

1. cjbgkagh · 1790731933 · focus · HN ↗

   I’m with the old guy on this, too long since it last flew.

   It makes no sense to me, it would be an expensive and pointless vanity project. Sounds like there is a chain of people too afraid to say no, perhaps they’re hoping to drag their heels until priorities change again.

   1. willtemperley · 1790751137 · focus · HN ↗

      I think it would be worth it for the sheer education and entertainment value.

      Seeing the SR-71 still gives me the same buzz as when I read about it in books as a child 40 years ago. It reminds me how cool technology can be, when it increasingly isn't.

      I also think it's pretty cool that arguably the most awesome aircraft in existence didn't have guns (I'm ignoring the YF-12).

      Make Technology Cool Again.

      1. ssl-3 · 1790759949 · focus · HN ↗

         I've got the same kind of nostalgia about it.

         It's been probably 40 years since I first became aware of the SR-71 myself. I'm definitely not a kid anymore; if I want to feel some sizzle in my SR-71 beans, then I can just get in the car, drive to Dayton, and see one in person.

         If that's not nostalgic enough then maybe I can spend some real money on a new-old-stock copy of the first new Lego kit I was given -- set 497 -- and bask in the rose-tinted glory of the past while I put it together on the rug.

         But sure: We can make tech cool again. Part of me thinks that tech should be amazing and cool to learn about.

         Kids deserve their own new generations of amazing technological spectacles to marvel at, not a resurrection of ghosts from 60 years ago.

         Remember how old and archaic it seemed when you were a kid, 40 years ago, and you saw something that was high-tech 60 years before that? We're talking 1926-level tech, here. I sure did love the local history museums that had areas that covered that timeframe, but I recognized them for what they were: Displays of really interesting very old stuff.

         We can do better than that for today's kids, but we can only get there by moving forwards -- not backwards.

   2. PaulRobinson · 1790762256 · focus · HN ↗

      I've suggested this elsewhere in this thread, but the analogue nature of it might be useful to current design teams to get familiar with operationally.

      Getting contemporary knowledge of the navigation, hydraulic, avionics and other systems is going to be pretty powerful if you need to build something that is as battlefield-ready in the modern era. Nobody is hacking into an SR-71, and it's going to be delivering its missions just fine if GPS is knocked out. Taking the operational (and not just academic) experience of doing that and putting it into the current generation of Skunk Works engineers is going to be useful.

      I'm not sure their plan is to put it into active service, but they could - the SR-72 could just be an SR-71 with upgraded engines and other systems.

      However, the process of getting it ready for active service even if just as a flying museum piece could sure help a lot of engineers learn a ton of lost knowledge.

      1. cjbgkagh · 1790780267 · focus · HN ↗

         I’m going to stick with my pointless designation, sure many things can yield knowledge and if money, time, and expertise were infinite then sure, why not. But they are finite and there a million better things for these people to be doing that would yield useful knowledge more efficiency.

         Engineering exists within an ecosystem and that old ecosystem is gone. Everything would be a once off. The materials science could be interesting but that’ll also be one offs and probably wouldn’t generalize.

   3. Tangurena2 · 1790792841 · focus · HN ↗

      The fuel it needs is no longer made.

      <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;JP-7" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;JP-7

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.