Time to Bring the SR-71 out of Mothballs?

[Muckmaw1]

Iran: U.S. spy planes spotted
over nuke sites
 


SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Tuesday, January 4, 2005
Iran has reported flights by U.S. military aircraft over nuclear facilities near the borders with Afghanistan and Iraq.

Iran's state-controlled media said the overflights by U.S. aircraft were spotted near a range of nuclear facilities, including the Bushehr nuclear reactor constructed by Russia.

In late December, Teheran ordered the Iranian Air Force to shoot down unidentified aircraft flying anywhere in the country. Iranian officials have accused Israel and the United States of seeking to conduct reconnaissance flights over Iran.

Iran has deployed anti-aircraft missiles around major nuclear sites, including Bushehr. So far, there have been no reports of Iranian missile fire toward U.S. or Israeli warplanes.

The U.S. reconnaissance flights were conducted as Iran was said to be accelerating its nuclear weapons programs in facilities unaccessible to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The U.S. aircraft said to have entered Iranian air space included F-16 multi-role fighters and F/A-18 attack jets, the reports said. The Iranian media said the aircraft appeared to have been sent on reconnaissance missions over Iran's nuclear sites, particularly in the southwestern province of Khuzestan.

On Monday, the Iranian newspaper Aftab reported the entry of a U.S. fighter-jet on Jan. 1. The unidentified fighter was said to have flown at low altitude over the northeastern province of Khorrasan which borders Afghanistan.

Iran's air defense command contains aging U.S.- and Russian-origin surface-to-air missile batteries not regarded as a threat to U.S. fighter-jets. The Iranian systems include the U.S. Hawk MIM-23B, the Russian SA-2, SA-5, SA-6 as well as the shoulder-launched SA-18. Iran has sought to purchase the Russian-origin S-300PMU long-range system.

So we really even need spy planes anymore? I thought Sattelites could do the job.

If we are still using aircraft, what would be using? U-2?

[SunTracker]

Or just hook a digital camera to that new Mach 10 jet.

[Wolf14]

I read somewher awhile back that like 6 SR-71'a were put back in service. They all needed work to get them flying again and they found out that the ones that had went through long term storage procedures were the ones that took the longest to get air worthy.

[indy007]

iirc, the USAF retired the Blackbird, but there's speculation the CIA has still been flying them in secret. Wouldn't be suprised if that were true with current events going on.

[Muckmaw1]

I was always of the belief that if they retired the blackbird, they must have something better we don't know about.

Of course, this is just an aviation enthusiasts romantic thoughts.

They prolly do the job with satellites...which is not nearly as sexy.

[weaselsan]

Originally posted by Muckmaw1
I was always of the belief that if they retired the blackbird, they must have something better we don't know about.

Of course, this is just an aviation enthusiasts romantic thoughts.

They prolly do the job with satellites...which is not nearly as sexy.

If they are planning on developing nuclear weapons at any of these facilities, spy planes are the least of their worries.

[GreenCloud]

muck..the airport where i fly my little cessna from is 15 miles south of Beale AFB

i seee U-2s there all the time..


awhile ago..i had a u-2 over my head at..he wasnt more then 2k above me...h ewas on aproach for landing...I think i was flyng faster then him..was sweet to see them so close up..and know..they were deep soemwhere takin pictures

[Vulcan]

Originally posted by indy007
iirc, the USAF retired the Blackbird, but there's speculation the CIA has still been flying them in secret. Wouldn't be suprised if that were true with current events going on.

Anyone seen Voss around lately?

(sorry Voss couldn't resist  )

[lada]

Originally posted by Muckmaw1


So we really even need spy planes anymore? I thought Sattelites could do the job.

If we are still using aircraft, what would be using? U-2?

it depend in whitch company do have Mr. President`s fun club money, doesnt it ?

[eagl]

Actually lada, it doesn't.

I don't know about what hardware your unit is receiving (you MUST be a US military member to have such intimate knowledge about where the money is going, right?) but the F-15E community is receiving many badly needed technology updates that will allow us to work much more closely with ground units, resulting in being able to do much more precise work with less manpower.  I couldn't care less who gets the money, but these upgrades have been on the wishlist for 12 years and neither President Bush had anything to do with it other than telling the project officers to go ahead.

Tell me who's pockets are lined with the cash from the sniper pod or litening AT pod projects, and you might uncover the grand conspiracy, but I've seen what each pod can do and the money has gone into high quality hardware that we need very badly.  That's just one of many examples of what you call "fun club money" being spent.

My Mom is the recipient of some of that "fun club money" because she's been working on the next generation joint service ejection seat.  Since it's my life she may be saving with her work, you can bet she takes her job seriously and has no problem taking her share of the budget to keep me and all our other pilots alive.

I won't say STFU because there's a chance you might have some actual experience, names, contracts, or numbers to back up your cheap shot at the President, but I will say that it IS a cheap shot and if you actually believe the propaganda you're repeating, you don't know what the hell you're talking about.  I've seen the hardware that's being bought and with the obvious exceptions of where outright fraud was being comitted (like that one lady who dished contracts to Boeing and is going to end up in jail for it), the money is being spent in good faith.

[lada]

so did Boeing lose that contract ?

Im not blaming quality of your HW... we all already know that some of it sux (like guns) some of it is quite nice piece of work.

But sign contracts for billion of $ during 2 months offensive in afghanistan, because 6 month ago it were politicaly hard to push  was quite cheap. May be it were case with the boeing.

However ... american companies are quite familiary with  bribery (as many other companies around the world).... And beat yourself to the chest and belive, that your politicals and national companies arent corrupted could point on lack of informations.

Here you have few more stories from the world
http://www.againstcorruption.org/BriefingsItem.asp?id=8553
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/oct2004/hall-o30.shtml
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/smallarms/2001/03bribes.htm
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-schatz072403.asp
http://www.seattleweekly.com/features/0441/041013_news_mossback.php

and another nice example of corruption: Mr. Bush got most of his money for last campain from companies who got contrats in Iraq. I somehow noted that some emrican people doesnt consider this to be corruption.... but we simply do.

here is some funny article if you can handle a bit of critics
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/reconstructindex.htm


hehe one more funny quote from mentioned article

Friday’s move was the first among many planned to eventually forgive the bulk of Iraq’s crippling debt burden. In exchange, Iraq will surrender its economic sovereignty to global financial institutions , provide foreign investors greater access to Iraqi natural resources, and increase investment opportunities for multinational corporations.

so basicaly goverment cut of debt and expect other companies to take over and benefit from their "gift"
Just have a look, whos own those companies. .. Its so classic.

[eagl]

Yes, Boeing lost that contract and had several others put on hold during the investigation.  It's going to delay several critical programs but that's the nature of fraud investigations I guess.

As for the other stuff, find me which contract LOSERS never got anywhere...  As far as I can tell, only the French got left out and that's because they were dragging their feet trying to milk more money out their contracts with Saddam.  Everyone holds the haliburton and titan contracts up to the conspiracy light, but they forget that there were maybe two or three companies in the entire world that could handle the scope of the jobs being contracted, and pretty much every company that could handle any given contract was awarded either their own contract or a piece of another one, and as soon as a suitable Iraqi business could be found to take over the contract, the work was transferred to the Iraqi company.  The initial contracts are either over or expiring, and it's not always the same company that gets the contract renewal.  I know several people working in Iraq and elsewhere who are out of a job because their company lost a contract that was awarded shortly after 9/11 or right after the Iraq invasion.  When you need a job done fast and there is only one company that can guarantee that it can get the job done, you give that company the contract regardless of how many conspiracy theories it will start.

I'm sure you and others like you would rather we used government funds to float loans to a half dozen startup companies, give them a few years sucking at the govt. money spigot until they were big enough, then hold a "competition" to award a contract to whatever government owned consortium played the political games the best, but that's the European model and the US is not going to play that particular economic game.  We've seen the work it turns out, the Tornado, the eurofighter, the joint french/uk carrier that keeps morphing into various different shapes, and we decided long ago that our system produces equal or better results in less time for less money.  Sure, that means we give the same old established companies the contracts instead of properly distributing it around to the proletariat, but that's the nature of capitalism.  When a country with over 10% unemployment and a huge welfare roster criticizes the US economy (not every EU country is like that but many critics are in that situation), it's really tough to not respond with a simple STFU.

[Hawklore]

Well, we gotta show some force some how..

We can't just say, looky what we tooky from a space sattelite, which could be computer generated images...

[Gunslinger]

I see two Black birds every day on the way to work with two bg ole holes in the wings were the engines used to be.

I have to beleive though that a sattilte would be more reliable and safer than using aircraft.

Let Iran shoot down an aircraft that's not over their territory and lets just see what happens.

[rshubert]

Originally posted by lada
so did Boeing lose that contract ?

Im not blaming quality of your HW... we all already know that some of it sux (like guns) some of it is quite nice piece of work.

 

Where are you, lada?  Identify the firearm product from your country that is better than say, the M16A2, or the M4 (neither of which are my personal favorites, btw).

How about artillery?  I know of two countries that have longer ranged guns than US Artillery pieces, are you from one of them?

How 'bout helicopters?  Does your country produce those?  Which ones?

Armored Fighting Vehicles?  Which ones?

The list goes on and on.  I have held, fired, and taken apart most of the current generation of infantry weapons, and can say--categorically--that there are some as good, but none superior to American weapons.