Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military
From: military@cbnews.ATT.COM (William B. Thacker)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: SR-71
Message-ID: <13880@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 12 Feb 90 04:26:10 GMT
References: <13764@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Organization: Anasazi, Inc.
Lines: 36
Approved: military@att.att.com
Full-Name:



From: texbell!asuvax.eas.asu.edu!anasaz!john
In article <13764@cbnews.ATT.COM> christ@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Chris Thompson) writes:
]From: christ@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Chris Thompson)
]
]I see in Saturday's paper that the Air Force has decided to ground the SR-71
]fleet.  The rationale is that it costs too much ($200-$300 million/year for
]the fleet) and that the KH-12 satellites being sent up now will replace the
]planes admirably.  Any thoughts?  

Hmm... The KH-12's are pretty predictable in their orbit paths, expensive
to maneuver over wide orbital variations (all satellites are), and
subject to A-sat devices early in a war. Sounds like a lousy choice
as the ONLY photo-recon system.

One would like to have:
  -Rapid deployment to any target world-wide
  -Unscheduled visits (i.e. the bad guys don't know when the recon
   is coming)
  -Survivability

Two possibilities come to mind:

(1) The decision was made by a non-warrior official on some silly grounds;
   -or-
(2) There is something else that fulfills the SR-71 mission. Perhaps
    the stealth fighter?



-- 
John Moore (NJ7E)           mcdphx!anasaz!john asuvax!anasaz!john
(602) 951-9326 (day or eve) long palladium, short petroleum
7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253
Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment!