Okay....that's Strange!

[NSTG8R]

Does this match the picture you took?

View attachment 10876

VERY close to what I saw, but without the "standard looking" contrail. Basically just the puffs.

 

[bunchathrees]

Could different atmospheric conditions result in different contrails?

 

[NSTG8R]

Could different atmospheric conditions result in different contrails?

I could see that as a possible cause. Kind of like ripples on a lake between the moister air [the "puffs"] and drier air above it [gaps]. You sometimes see cirrus clouds with a similar wavy/rippled pattern. Problem with that theory is the first craft passed through the cloud causing a distrail [cleared a path like a snowplow], and the second one, going DIRECTLY down the path of the first, but in an opposite direction, left the "puffed" contrail. All this is assuming the two aircraft were at the same altitude, which is a huge assumption on my part.

 

[Rob Croson]

So what did replace the SR71? The public thinks it's been satellites because that's what they were told, but why are they testing the X 47B? What is in service for surveillance? And why haven't they ever announced an aircraft to replace the SR71?

Do they need a replacement for it? Who knows how many surveillance satellites are in orbit, and what they can see. With enough of them orbiting the globe, you could get full coverage, without the need to send people into foreign airspace. Surveillance from orbit also avoids the diplomatic difficulties involved in violating that airspace.

SR71 was needed when satellite reconnaissance wasn't that good. You *needed* to get the camera closer. With changes to surveillance technologies, maybe you just don't need that capability anymore.

 

[Coss]

VERY close to what I saw, but without the "standard looking" contrail. Basically just the puffs.

That picture was taken from an article about the SR72.
The article was late 2013 and I can't find a thing about it after that date.
I don't know if they dropped the project; or put a lid on the information about it.

 

[Ian442]

Ahh the SR71. A mechanical nightmare to maintain. I worked with SR71 crew chiefs first hand at Beale.

1. Air power was delivered by a Buick 455 cu. In motor to run the starter.

2. The oil was SOLID at room temperature. You baked it in an oven to get liquid form.

3. JPTS fuel constantly leaked from the air frame on the ground due to the amount of flex in the aircraft skin. JPTS is akin to diesel fuel FYI.

 

[Folks]

Ahh the SR71. A mechanical nightmare to maintain. I worked with SR71 crew chiefs first hand at Beale.

1. Air power was delivered by a Buick 455 cu. In motor to run the starter.

2. The oil was SOLID at room temperature. You baked it in an oven to get liquid form.

3. JPTS fuel constantly leaked from the air frame on the ground due to the amount of flex in the aircraft skin. JPTS is akin to diesel fuel FYI.

Ditos to the leaking fuel. What a mess.

 

[Frim]

In 2000, Task Research fabricated an air foil that looked like one half of an eggshell. It was about 35' on the long Dim. and about 6' deep. We did not learn what it was. We were contracted to build it at Lockheed.
Now with my foil hat firmly in place, we are told that for every force there is an equal and opposite force. So, I ask, where is antigravity, the force opposite of gravity? It must exist somewhere.

 

[Rob Croson]

Now with my foil hat firmly in place, we are told that for every force there is an equal and opposite force.

Newton's third law:
"When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body."

Popularly paraphrased: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."

So, I ask, where is antigravity, the force opposite of gravity? It must exist somewhere.

There is no "antigravity" that opposes gravity, nor is there required to be such a force to fulfill Newton's third law. When the earth's gravity pulls on you with a certain force, you are also exerting the exact same gravitational force on the earth. That is the "equal in magnitude and opposite in direction" force that Newton's law says exists. The earth pulls on you with 150 pounds, you pull back on the earth with 150 pounds. Same force, opposite direction.

 

[Ty]

Newton's third law:
"When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body."

Popularly paraphrased: "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction."

There is no "antigravity" that opposes gravity, nor is there required to be such a force to fulfill Newton's third law. When the earth's gravity pulls on you with a certain force, you are also exerting the exact same gravitational force on the earth. That is the "equal in magnitude and opposite in direction" force that Newton's law says exists. The earth pulls on you with 150 pounds, you pull back on the earth with 150 pounds. Same force, opposite direction.

It gets a little more confusing when the bodies aren't in contact. Take the moon. The earth's gravity pulls on the moon and the moon pulls back on the earth. The circular orbit of the moon is proof the earth has a hold on it. The tides are proof the moon pulls right back.