The aircraft naming convention - F for fighter, B for bomber, U for utility, SR for strategic reconnaissance - would mean that the YF is "You're F*cked".

@devnandannair2336

2 жыл бұрын

well then the YF-22 would have never became the F-22 because it was out of the prototype phase (YF is actually for prototype aircraft, thats why we call it the F-15 and not the YF-15, that's why we call the YF-23 (competitor to the YF-22) the YF-23 not the F-23, because it was always a prototype)

@dannypipewrench533

Жыл бұрын

@@devnandannair2336 This is what we call a joke.

@levertigo2665

2 ай бұрын

You’re Fucked-12

My father was an Air Force officer stationed at Edwards AFB from 1965 - 1967. Our neighbor across the street, Capt, Ben Bowles was a YF-12 driver. Our neighbor next door on left flew F-111 Ardvark. I was in High School on base. A classmate, Jim Fulton's father (Jimey Fulton) flew the XB-70. Exciting times!!

@gabrielbennett5162

2 жыл бұрын

My grandfather, Victor Horton, flew on the YF-12, SR-71 and other aircraft with Jim Fulton's dad, Fitz, many times. They also flew together on the Shuttle Carrier Aircraft. Fitz was literally the best multi-engine pilot in the world at the time, even acknowledged by the Soviets as such. My Granny always harbored a lot of trepidation about Grandpa making risky test flights (it about drove her to chain-smoking at times), but she always felt a lot better about it if Fitz was in the front seat.

@borntoclimb7116

Жыл бұрын

Must being awesome

As a kid we saw it on a tour at Edwards in the mid 60's. It was way off by itself fenced off with Air Police guarding it. We were not allowed near it. We were allowed to go in the hanger with the XB70, and they gave us a pin. Man I wish I had that pin today. got to walk around all the X-15s (yes there were more than one all called x-15). Also got to sit in the XB111 later to become the F-111 Aardvark. YF-12A was awesome.

@craiglizt8074

Жыл бұрын

Wow! You're a lucky dude. I grew up near Edwards in the 80s; it was such an epic place to see aviation. I knew it was special even then.

This and the Valkyrie were the sexiest jets ever made.

@wandery2k

2 жыл бұрын

👍 and…imo, the B-58 Hustler

@ianobrien3248

2 жыл бұрын

They have both at Wright Patterson AFB in the Air Force Museum in Dayton. Very cool to see both in person and up close-ish! The Valkyrie is HUGE.

@samjohnson9894

2 жыл бұрын

Agreed. And I put the YF23 Black Widow 2 as the sexy jet to never be produced.

@devnandannair2336

2 жыл бұрын

Disagreed

@nowthatsjustducky

2 жыл бұрын

Nah, that honor goes to the A-10 Thunderbolt II.

"Hey, you know that aircraft you keep spotting over your territory? Don't worry, it's not a spyplane, it's a weapons platform!"

@dennisheaton4008

2 жыл бұрын

Saw a lot of those "weapon's platforms" at night when I was stationed at Edwards AFB in the early 70's.

What is so surprising to me is the speed at which jet aircraft developed after WWII. Some of the planes that became mainstays (e.g. Phantom II) was developed and flying in secrecy around 10 years before the public knew anything about it. While growing up in the '50s I had the hobby of building plastic model fighters. I had so many that my mother decided that the best place for them was in the air. So, she had them attached by string to the ceiling in my bedroom. Heck, I thought that the Panther was a neat plane. Then came the Phantom II. Little did I (or Revell) know of what was being done behind closed (hangar) doors.

Got to sit in the forward cockpit of the SR 71 at the Museum of Aviation at Robins AFB back in the 90's. Got to geek out for a while.

@SiliconBong

2 жыл бұрын

Lucky you.

@sasquatchycowboy5585

2 жыл бұрын

That would be cool.

Way back in 1977 I was in AF tech training at Chanute AFB and mentioned the fighter version of the SR71. I even told them it's designation of YF-12, and that my father worked at Lockeed and had told me about it. I was laughed at saying no such thing exists. Well to those fellow vets, you were wrong and I was right! Well they knew that at the time when word passed around that a model of it was for sale at a local hobby shop. I spent most of my free time at that hobby shop as they had an electric car race track and events. That was a blast! Later stationed at Kadena AB, I got close up views of the SR-71 that we called a Habu. During cross over time of deployment they needed a hanger to store the Habu in, and that was my hanger which was just across the taxi way from their hanger. The SP let us tour the exterior, the canopy was off limits. I really enjoyed watching them launch, especially right after sunset as the engine glow was super pronounced.

@pmcmac71

2 жыл бұрын

That's "hangar," youngster. ":hangers" have other uses!

@michaelwmcdonald

2 жыл бұрын

@@pmcmac71 thanks grandpa for correcting my spelling. We all need to be more careful as we might infect others with our misspelling's . While we're at it, why not fix your grammar?

@tonymorris4335

2 жыл бұрын

@@michaelwmcdonald Yea, why not get childish when corrected on a common misspelling, that looks very mature and grown up.

@michaelwmcdonald

2 жыл бұрын

@@tonymorris4335 it's the way he did it that matters, particularly when he made several grammatical errors he shouldn't be correcting someone's spelling error.

My grandfather, Victor Horton, was one of the men who flew the YF-12A after the prototypes were transferred to NASA in 1969. 60-6935, which now resides at the USAF Museum in Dayton, OH was his plane. You can see him about 23 : 45 in on this video, being wired for sound: kzread.info/dash/bejne/qmVpt7GMicmffdI.html He usually flew as a team with Fitz Fulton, but also made flights with Don Mallick, Tom McMurtry, William Dana (the X-15 pilot) and others. I have many stories about his adventures with the Blackbirds. Having flown both, Grandpa actually liked the YF-12 better than the SR-71 and said it was the better plane, being more ruggedly built and slightly faster than its more famous sibling.

8:09 the head on prolife of the Blackbird makes it look like an evil viper, enough to send shiver through the enemy's spine.

Nice work, watching those old test flights is beautiful.

It was designed to carry "8", AIM-47A air defense missiles, Range-100mi, at Mach-6 ( Fully Active Radar Homing, combined with Terminal Infra Red homing, at 20mi to target ) . . . Radar-ASG-18, 350 mile range

@keirfarnum6811

2 жыл бұрын

Wow! I didn’t realize the AIM-47 had both active radar and terminal IR guidance. That’s impressive!

@montanabulldog9687

2 жыл бұрын

@@keirfarnum6811 Its surprising that its NOT, still in service "Today" . . . in a MUCH IMPROVED version, of course . . . like the AIM-9 "Sidewinder".

@Lovealwayskamber

2 жыл бұрын

How do you know so much about Blackbirds?

@montanabulldog9687

2 жыл бұрын

@@Lovealwayskamber Many years of "Detailed Study", long before there was an INTERNET . . .

@Lovealwayskamber

2 жыл бұрын

@Montana Bulldog If you have Instagram, there is an account on all things Blackbird. It's called @romig21. It's very interesting.

I wish the SR-71/A-12/YF-12 would come to flight simulator.

@richardweernink9050

2 жыл бұрын

sr 71 has been on xplane for a while

@CRAZYHORSE19682003

2 жыл бұрын

@@richardweernink9050 Can it fly at MACH 3.2?

Its The yf-23 that we should be flying

2070mph with 125 mile radar detection. can see a problem right there.

I remember in 1976, seeing the SR-71 BLACKBIRD over San Bernardino Valley into Norton AFB fly-by hearing my mother say, "La bruja!" The Witch 🧙 💥....💨......🧹flying thur on a Black Broom thundering over the mountains. SR-71 look like the front cockpit of My Favorite Martian space vehicle parked in his garage.🧹💥💨.........💨........💨...........🕳️

Amazing. Almost 60 years later, still unsurpassed as an aircraft in terms of speed and altitude.

@sammy4538

6 ай бұрын

MiG-25's were tracked on radar during Persian Gulf War, momentarily reaching Mach 3.2... then again, engines used on them would start to wear out quite fast beyond Mach 2.5... but atleast for a while it could still do it. MiG-25 has also reached 118,900 ft altitude without payload. Considering it's a fighter jet, development started late 50's, first flight being in 1964, these also pretty impressive numbers...

All those planes were basically missiles themselves

@sulufest

2 жыл бұрын

Mmm… not accurate.

@Hardline1225

2 жыл бұрын

@@sulufest accurate

@koekiejam18

2 жыл бұрын

its more like a missile propelled lawndart

@QueenDaenerysTargaryen

2 жыл бұрын

Rocket🚀 ✈plane

@allangibson2408

2 жыл бұрын

The SR-71 could outrun most anti aircraft missiles easily…

You mention a ventral fin for stability, but the video shows something else. The actual ventral fin is much larger, and has to fold up against the fuselage for landing. It is difficult to see in most of the in-flight views, because of the viewing angle. Perhaps the desktop model shows it best.

@bosoerjadi2838

2 жыл бұрын

Yes. The one depicted looks like an antenna.

@plat216

2 жыл бұрын

they remind me of the tomcat’s ventral fins

@BruceNitroxpro

2 жыл бұрын

@@bosoerjadi2838 , That antenna would be exactly right, but my guess is that it is for reception only.

Sibling? More like Parent.

@7:19 The SR-71C was NOT a static test specimen. It was a dual cockpit trainer aircraft that replaced one of the two SR-71B models lost in a crash. The SR-71C allowed the SR-71 program to continue pilot training flights whenever the remaining SR-71B was down for maintenance.

@49metal

Жыл бұрын

Well, what is the SR-71C? A dual cockpit trainer, as you state, but it was built by mating two pieces of junk: The rear half of YF-12A #06934 and an engineering mockup of the SR-71B that was indeed built exclusively for static testing. While the video's narration is a hopelessly confused mess, it seems to be saying that #06934 was used to build a static test frame for some kind of SR and somehow the SR-71C emerged. Obviously, #06934 was never used or built as a static test piece, but the truth is the SR-71C #17981 WAS built from such a piece. This queer origin is commonly cited as the reason #981 was known as "The Bastard."

@IvanKapor

Жыл бұрын

@@49metal Absolutely correct. The Bastard flew with a constant yaw so was not used as much as the others. The only thing I disagree is that the 71C was made from two pieces of junk :) just semantics I suppose . Maybe more of a Franken-Blackbird (rather FrankenBird's Monster?)

US AIR FORCE "The Delta dart will be the pinnacle of fighter/interceptor technology" RED BARON: *stares in 160 horse power wooden biplane*

@finnbarber1488

2 жыл бұрын

Delta Dart was such a cool plane.

@worldtraveler930

2 жыл бұрын

So what no mention of the focker tri plane?

MR HUNTER WHAT U TINK, AIR N OUT, SPEEDS 2. MILLION MPH > IQ > ENERGY

SR71 is the coolest thing humankind has ever invented.

The YF12 was supposed to be mass produced, the government terminated the contract after it was given to general dynamics/Lockheed martin. My mother was on the team that sued the government for termination of contract. Ultimately Lockheed got their money, the government got no aircraft and the YF12 (A12) program got put in the history book. sad.

Finally, an aviation video with an excellent voiceover. Thumbs up!

Not many people even know about the A-12, they just know about the SR-71, and they also don't know that the first super duper reconnaissance aircraft could fly higher and faster than the brilliant Blackbird. I've only seen it once, at the Mildenhall (here in England) air show when I was a boy. It didn't fly, it was on the ground, windows blacked out, MP's around it to stop you getting too close to it, engine covers on but it caused great excitement because nobody had ever seen anything like it before. I fell in love with it there and then. 🇬🇧🇺🇸✌✌

@IvanKapor

Жыл бұрын

You can go see the one on display at IWM Duxford...

Engineer on it, radar , my dad, dropped me in the cockpit when I was a kid.

1:51 that XF-108 Rapier reminds me of an Avro Arrow.

If only they converted all the CIA SR-71 that were locked away into the AF-12Bs, they had so many.

My now deceased step father worked on SR71s. He was I bel ieve a designer and/ or an engineer.

the F106 held the speed record in 1969 at over 1500 miles an hour. With only one engine.

Good video. I love your channel ❤

In the late 80s, my brother, who worked for defense contractors in Grand Prairie Texas, told me about the Secret YF-12-A that was made to intercept and shoot down ICBMs. Idk if it was accurate, but he thought it was, back in the day… He said cancellation was a decoy.

@brandonh5201

2 жыл бұрын

Could have been...look at the Comanche project, it was a decoy, there making them now only with some slight changes for cheaper cost they call it the Bell 360 now

@YTjndallas

2 жыл бұрын

@@brandonh5201 Thanks for your reply.

How can a plane that flies faster than its armament launch a missile? "Fox 2"......."Let me try this again"..... "Fox 2"...... "Alpha Base, can you confirm missile launch?"........"Sierra Romeo"...... "You're flying past the missile."

@robbfisher2876

2 жыл бұрын

Physics... the missile is inside the aircraft, going the same speed... also, the aircraft would not be at max operating speed when they bay doors opened.

@koekiejam18

2 жыл бұрын

@@robbfisher2876 if you are driving in a car for example, and throw a tennisball forwards, you'll see that the tennisball will be infront of you for a short time, the only reason you overtake it is because the car keeps accelerating, if the tennisball had a rocketmotor, it would take a while to overtake the tennisball regardless of your speed. This is very actively used by modern fighter planes. If you use the trust of the plane to break through the sound barrier and accelerate to lets say mach 1.6, the missile will start at that speed, meaning it wont have to use any energy to break the sound barrier and accelerate causing it to go much further

@robbfisher2876

2 жыл бұрын

@@koekiejam18 Yes, though a better analogy would be just dropping the ball... also, I'm not the one who asked the original question! :)

@koekiejam18

2 жыл бұрын

@@robbfisher2876 My bad, i dont answer enough youtube comments to be that proficient in commenting on youtube hah! Altough you are 100% correct that dropping a ball is a better analogy, i tried to somehow include the fact that you dont overtake the missile in my analogy, hence why it isnt that accurate. Regardless its a fascinating bit of physics

SR71 is a surprisingly small jet. There's one in a flight museum in Wilsonville OR. The pics and videos make it appear rather large...

@montanabulldog9687

2 жыл бұрын

I'd call 102 Ft LONG . . . on the "Large" side !

@King_reretard

2 жыл бұрын

It's over 100 ft long. The f22 is half the size and that's a pretty big jet. St71 is the length of a bomber...

@john-ze7eu

2 жыл бұрын

@@King_reretard stand next to one.. You'll be surprised

@Lovealwayskamber

2 жыл бұрын

I'm always surprised how big they are.

@montanabulldog9687

2 жыл бұрын

@@Lovealwayskamber 102 Ft LONG, 69Ft WIDE . . . heres a "Good Piece" of info, that not many even KNOW . . . the SR-71, an the "Rest" of her family . . . it actually "Grows", LONGER . . . while its in full flight ( Just about "2" Full Inches ! )

Fantastic aeroplane 👍✈️

Sr 71 between Lybia and Sicily reached 4200 km/h

I grew up under the apparent misguided impression that it was called that yf-12a. And that the Phoenix muscle so widely used on the F-14 Tomcat was originally designed as a supersonic missile that could be launched while at supersonic speeds from the yf-12a

Just a few touch ups on the SR 71 I think it would be a legendary war bird !!? . just like the YF23. ! That to should have been chosen instead of the 22 because I really like 2 different things that really could and probably can make some serious changes in war zone . witch are speed and stealth ! Just put a good brain on them both and you got something the enemy would really fear the most !? . the brains to me are the find track and lock systems along with other systems ? I don't know them all but I know a few lol . Any way if they still have the black bird still they could rebuild the weapon bays like one big one in the middle then 4 one the out side of it around the front ?! . because today I can see a handful of ideas what they could've done for the weapon bays ? And all the different types of missiles and rockets or even have that rotator weapon system in it along with them storm breakers missiles or some of them nsm,s !! The list can go on dude !! .

We need to bring these back.

Impressive aircraft ⚡⚡⚡⚡

I am surprised that with one of these super fast fighters that opening a hatch to fire a missile did not cause an instability in the aircraft.

Wait.... the picture at 7:11 of 936, I've never seen that picture before. I have been to the crash site and I have pieces of that plane, but based on the only video I've ever seen of the crash it doesn't look like the wreckage would look like what is pictured at 7:11. Also, the terrain in the images isn't what the area 936 crashed into looks like, so I suppose this could be the remains being placed back at Edwards or Groom, after the crash. Can someone confirm where this image came from and the details?

What a shame this one never saw the service

Something I keep noticing with these aircraft (this family) is the use of the engine Nacelle Cone, similar to the Mig-21. I wonder if those cones were movable, and for the same reason as the Mig-21 for trans-sonic management? Amazing aircraft, and also the Cockpit window shape hearkens to the F-117A, curious how much technology from these interceptors, high altitude reconnaissance planes carried over into the 80's and 90's? Also the organic flow of the YF and SR are similar to the F-35 body shapes. Incredible tech and lineage.

@FlyingTigress

2 жыл бұрын

They did.

@brrrtnerd2450

2 жыл бұрын

@@FlyingTigress Thank you!

@sulufest

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, those cone spikes managed the airflow into the engines at higher speeds to create ramjet effect making them “turbo-ramjets”.

@montanabulldog9687

2 жыл бұрын

The "Cone", as your calling it, is actually a "Shock Cone" . . . it MOVES, a total of "26" inches, back an forth . . . its designed to SLOW incoming air, to prevent a "Turbine Stall".

@brrrtnerd2450

2 жыл бұрын

@@montanabulldog9687 Thanks Montana appreciate your detail. I can't keep it all straight.

that plane made from a lot of different materials that why not too many around

it would have been an epic weapon

What was that cylinder they flight tested under the missile bays...it appeared to have some kind of insulation layer blow off just after the 6 minute mark

@blurglide

2 жыл бұрын

@Galileo7of9 No shit- I wouldn't be asking what it was if it was covered in the video

I like that david schwimmer did the narration.

@IvanKapor

Жыл бұрын

😄

Sounds to me, like they had too many variants, which cost them in the production run

I've read somewhere that they also developed a gravity bomb that was basically a tungsten lawn dart that would deplete its kinetic energy on a surface target. Can anyone confirm this?

7:43 Its bent!

I heard the SR-71C actually flew, but because it was two airplanes put together it was terrible If I recall, they called it the 'Bastard'

It had a camera, but missiles would have fit!!!

why hasn't that project been attempted? Maybe add a enclosed tail rotor and use the blades from the Comanche project..... maybe connect the blades directly to the body of a bell 222 and use the same kind of metal that the SR-71 used and then see if you can push a bell 222 to at least close to Mach 1 Mach 2 speeds.

I’m not sure it’ll happen in my lifetime but I’d love to see the A12’s declassified capabilities. Even what’s declassified, it’s been unsurpassed but how high did it really set the bar?

Would be cool Not only Air to Air also Air to Ground

I think we would be foolish to assume that some modern variant of this craft has not at least been designed let alone a prototype is in existence, we've all heard about the 'Aurora' whether or not 'that plane' exists we can be sure 'a plane' exists that the US has kept speed and altitude in mind for. I don't think they would shut down such a project, even with the direction of stealth that the US has taken over speed for the bog standard fighters and bombers in the USAF, there's every chance that they have something more modern like the SR or YF sitting on a shelf ready for 'the mission'.

We almost got a Mach 4 version with nasa...

Why wasn't thing written into the TV series Airwolf?

@TommygunNG

2 жыл бұрын

Probably for the same reason the writers didn't include the F-106: It's totally out of the souped-up helo's weight class and operating range.

@brandonh5201

2 жыл бұрын

More importantly why wasn't airwolf made real? ....theres a AF general who said he's actually trying to get a airwolf made, just add things like a inclosed tailrotater and mount the top blades to the body like the rah66 comanche did, so it will hold together at speeds around much 1.

The narration that says "...boasting an increase in range to 1,350 nautical miles" at 5:00 must be wrong. The plane would have to be refueled about every half hour!

@holton345

2 жыл бұрын

The YF-12 had a range of just under 3,000 miles, and the SR-71 had a range of right around 3,350. both were capable of in-flight refueling, so they could stay aloft for long missions, providing support planes were loitering at key locations.

What’s crazy is the MiG-31 is a Mach 3.5 fighter supposedly

@sammy4538

6 ай бұрын

MiG-25 has been tracked on radar to have reached Mach 3.2 at times, and has 2x 100kN engines - while the MiG-31 engines have 2x 135kN of thrust, and I would assume also improved aerodynamics over the older model... MiG-25 had engines designed for ICBM's, them started to overheat at such speeds - but could still do it. MiG-31 engines are stronger, and assumably designed for being used in a jet fighter, re-usable and all... If think of it, that Mach 3.5 might not even be too far off - atleast should be well over that Mach 3.2 that MiG-25 could reach.

this plane look ADFX-01 Morgan

Not a very practical interceptor. It took a lot to get ready for a mission, so it couldn't just be standing at the ready on the off chance enemy bombers were detected

@brandonh5201

2 жыл бұрын

Well if one was always flying at any given time then it would have been. ....its still better then the crap were flying now, the f35 is junk! And now the idiot and chief is putting old f15s in service to replace the f22s..... the best jets we got. ....i bet the yf12 would be the best jets built to take on china today. ....fly in blow the place up be back before they even knew what hit them.

@justarandomtechpriest1578

2 жыл бұрын

@@brandonh5201 f15s are proven And they are a much better variant

RESTORED LAW IN REDONDO BEACH CITY, NEW POLICE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES NO MORE RECATERING ON CIVILIANS OF REDONDO BEACH CITY, CALIFORNIA

Isn't the mig25 a faster interceptor?

@shrimpflea

Жыл бұрын

Nah the MIg 25 was a joke

@sammy4538

6 ай бұрын

MiG-25 officially had top speed of Mach 2.83, but was said to be capable of Mach 3... and in combat, has been tracked to reach even Mach 3.2... and this is with 2x 100kN engines. MiG-31 officially has top speed of Mach 3... but also has 2x 135kN engines, while the materials and aerodynaamics have assumably also being improved since the 60's, when MiG-25 came out... most likely MiG-31 is in reality capable of reaching well past that Mach 3.2 the older model could do - and assumably without permanent engine damage, unlike MiG-25...

Developing this to kill old prop rusky bombers is like using an a bomb to clear some leaves 🤣

A-I-M ... lol

Humans are awesome. But so dangerous.

Too bad the idiot politicians cancelled the avro arrow it could have done mach 3 and was designed to be an interceptor.

I hope the US Airforce will step in such a program again. Although ICBM's indeed changed the course of airdefense in general, I really think that operational YF-12 type of airplanes could do a lot of stuff still nowadays. Give 25 YF-12's to the Ukrainian Airforce with advanced missiles. See how that will help them defeating the Russian warcriminals invading their beloved Ukraine!

2070 mph is Mach 3.13.not 2.70 The speed of sound at altitude is 660 mph, based on ICAO outside air temperature. You get Mach 2.70 only if one uses the sea level speed of sound to calculate Mach number. One of the reasons we didn't build more YF-12s is that we had bought the titanium to build the A-12 and SR-71s from Russia using dummy corporations. I suspect we had run out of titanium, and Russia wasn't going to fall for the same trick twice,

Way to prep that War Bird 🦅. God’s speed Lady’s and Gentlemen. Move out the way we have a Country to Save. Giddy up little Doggie way to drive that Mule. All day long Yahoo

Do you have it wrong the SR 71 is the YF12A sibling YOUR facts are wrong

We frittered awaysuch dominance that only traitors in our midst can account for it.

REALMS I'M FLYING TOO WASHINGTON, REDONDO BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT STATION, LAW N ORDER RESTORED, U I AND OTHERS SAME NO TAKE OVERS, UNCONDITIONALLY LOVE U AND ALL ETC

My neighbor has a YF-12

@nowthatsjustducky

2 жыл бұрын

From Revell or Monogram?

@privatedata665

2 жыл бұрын

@@nowthatsjustducky A Cheap knock off of Chengdu copy

The elites sell weapons to both sides, the zombies go...wow isn't it amazing..

The greatest lie ever told. The SR-71 was a spy plane. The nose is removable. It could switch roles with a nose change. The Blackbird was a first strike nuclear stealth bomber.

@TheTalkWatcher

2 жыл бұрын

@Galileo7of9 Why? It is obvious. First the original Blackbird designation was A or Attack. You don't attack with cameras. Second, we know from the history of the U2 that the military was not interested in plane that could not be used to attack. Third you you don't spend 1 billion dollars (1963) per plane for recon. The Blackbird was more expensive than an aircraft carrier. They cost twice as much per plane than the CVN Enterprise. The Blackbirds were first strike weapons.

@TheTalkWatcher

2 жыл бұрын

@Galileo7of9 They were part of the same family of planes. ALL were Blackbirds.

@TheTalkWatcher

2 жыл бұрын

@Galileo7of9 No, it meant attack. The Blackbird was introduced as the A11. Then the name was changed to the A12. It was not a new iteration. This Archangel nonsense was clearly diplomatic backpeddling to reduce the the provocation of flying the plane over the USSR, CHINA ETC.

@TheTalkWatcher

2 жыл бұрын

@Galileo7of9 Yes, clearly they were backpeddling. Unless my memory fails me. There was no mention of ARCHANGEL in the firstly press releases. Why is that? The Soviets were watching. They and the rest of the world are going to read that A for attack.

@TheTalkWatcher

2 жыл бұрын

@Galileo7of9 You don't know as much about the plane as I do. When or if you do, you will come to the same conclusion. But to play your game. What would count as proof? Define your terms.