Topic: Top 50 Fastest Aircrafts 2

U.S. Cavalry

FAQ/Rules - Search - Military Photo Gallery

  International Military Forums > Military Discussion Forums > Military Hardware, Gear and Technology
User Name
Password

 
May 5th, 2005   Post 11
behemoth79
Tribuni Angusticlavii
 
 
yes but if you are flying at a constant speed, the g-forces dont affect you. the astronauts are only strapped in during those times because during actual space flight the speed is constant so the body is not affected. its like riding in a car or bus. you only feel the pressure during acceleration and stopping. so as long as the speed is constant, no worries.
__________________


si deum nobiscum, quis contra?
AS LONG AS DIXIE STILL EXISTS,THIS COUNTRY WILL NEVER FALL
 
May 5th, 2005   Post 12
Themrose89
Centurion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by behemoth79
Quote:
Originally Posted by RankIt
Isn't the SR-71 the fastest?
it was when it first came out. the X series is taking over now.

hasnt the SR-71 been retired?
Its back out
__________________
Not everything that is faced can be changed, but nothing can be changed until it is face.
James Baldwin.
 
May 5th, 2005   Post 13
Doppleganger
Tribuni Angusticlavii
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by behemoth79
yes but if you are flying at a constant speed, the g-forces dont affect you. the astronauts are only strapped in during those times because during actual space flight the speed is constant so the body is not affected. its like riding in a car or bus. you only feel the pressure during acceleration and stopping. so as long as the speed is constant, no worries.
Plus the fact in space there are no G-Forces, or very minimal ones. I'm hardly an expert so if anyone knows different please correct me. Launching spacecraft in space will get round the big G's required to break the Earth's gravitational pull.
__________________
"An Emperor is subject to no-one but God and justice."

Frederick 1, Barbarossa
 
May 5th, 2005   Post 14
AussieNick
Forum Digger
 
 
Gear

Quote:
G's required to break the Earth's gravitational pull.
The issue isn't G-forces in outer space. I mean there are more G-s being pulled to escape the earth's pull than a plane would use to accelerate to high speed.

The human body can travel at high speed, and regularly does. I probably pull more G's on my motorbike or in my ute than are required to get the plane up to speed
__________________
Platoon Commander, 4 Platoon, B Company
10/27th Battalion RSAR - RAinf

PRO PATRIA
 
May 5th, 2005   Post 15
Trevor
Tribuni Angusticlavii
 
X-43 is the scramjet if I'm not mistaken?
__________________
WO2 Trevor Perry,
Squadron Deputy Commander
746 Lightning Hawk RCACS
 
May 5th, 2005   Post 16
Shaan14
Milites Gregarius
 
SR-71 getting old now they should be able to invent a better aircraft now. and it could no way top 9.8mach but it used to be the fastest for a long time. its a good spy plane
__________________
Outnumbered but never Outgunned

We Will Rise Again
India
 
May 6th, 2005   Post 17
Jack_Mordino
Milites Gregarius
 
 
Are you sure the SR71 managed only about 3.2 mach? The Mig25R Foxbat is also at 3.2 and outperforms the SR71 in altitude while retaining a conventional fighter airplane design, nothing like the exotic lines of the SR71.
__________________
The good guys are the ones who won the war
 
May 6th, 2005   Post 18
WarMachine
Primus Pilus
 
 
yea but the foxbat isn't all that great for reconaissance whereas that's all the sr 71 did. Plus the blackbird was made earlier and bigger would make since given the technology

Btw, are you guys saying that g forces has nothing to do with a pliot's integrity? If they're moving at 10g's then they're gonna need a good system to make sure they don't pass out, why do you think sr 71 pilots wear spacesuits? Well, ok they wear them to survive in case of ejection, but still, those breathing tubes pilots wear is for sustaining themselves at high speeds.
 
May 6th, 2005   Post 19
Jack_Mordino
Milites Gregarius
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarMachine
yea but the foxbat isn't all that great for reconaissance whereas that's all the sr 71 did. Plus the blackbird was made earlier and bigger would make since given the technology
Never said the opposite. The Foxbat, as well as its successor the Foxhound were interceptors, designed to down hostile strategic bombers at safe distances. They also had an anti-satellite role. My surprise was that the SR71 "only" made 3.2 mach, I thought it could do a lot more...
 
May 6th, 2005   Post 20
MontyB
Tribunus Laticlavius
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack_Mordino
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarMachine
yea but the foxbat isn't all that great for reconaissance whereas that's all the sr 71 did. Plus the blackbird was made earlier and bigger would make since given the technology
Never said the opposite. The Foxbat, as well as its successor the Foxhound were interceptors, designed to down hostile strategic bombers at safe distances. They also had an anti-satellite role. My surprise was that the SR71 "only" made 3.2 mach, I thought it could do a lot more...
I think you will find that the SR71s mach 3.2 rating is only its "known/declared" speed it was in fact quicker than that.
__________________
To mistrust science and deny the validity of the scientific method is to resign your job as a human. You'd better go look for work as a plant or wild animal.
P. J. O'Rourke