Electrosphere.info: RF-12A2 Blackbird II - Electrosphere.info

Jump to content

Hide message Show message
Welcome to Electrosphere.info!

Join us now to get access to all our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, and so, so much more.

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

RF-12A2 Blackbird II High Altitude Interceptor

#1 User is offline   Traben 

  • That Guy
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 1,619
  • Joined: 03-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Aircraft:F-4 Phantom II
  • Squadron:Ribbon Squadron

Posted 04 April 2008 - 04:23 AM

RF-12A2 Blackbird II
- High Altitude Interceptor -


Blackbird II Picture A - Blackbird II Picture B - RF-12A2 Rocket Sled

GAMES FEATURED IN:
Ace Combat 3: Electrosphere (NTSC-J)
Ace Combat 3: Electrosphere (Other Formats)

OPERATORS:
Universal Peace Enforcement Organization (AC3:US)
General Resource Defense Force (AC3:JP)

VARIANTS:
SR-71 Blackbird

WEAPONS:
Vulcan Machine Gun
Heavy Machine Gun
Standard Missile
Short Range Missile
MIRV

STATS:

Power: 100
Attack: 35
Defense: 75
Stability: 35
Mobility: 10

SPECIFICATIONS:
Width: 16.94 m
Length: 31.65 m
Height: 5.64 m
Total mass:78020 kg
Max speed:4883 km/h
Damage Tolerance:Heavy

OVERVIEW:
Fusing design elements from the ill-fated YF-12A and the infamous SR-71 Blackbird, the RF-12A2 is a massive high altitude interceptor designed to destroy targets while operating at high altitudes. Like many modernized designs from General Resource, the aircraft is equipped with the ENSI COFFIN and has numerous minor changes to the shape of the airframe for optimum performace.

A notable feature of this aircraft is the fact that it is launched using attached rockets as opposed to conventional take off procedures.

RF-12A2 on its rocket sled
- an RF-12A2 using an rocket sled to rapidly climb and intercept Neucom Transports at White Valley AB. -


SOURCES
Ace Combat 03: Electrosphere (NTSC-J) (In-game data)
Ace Combat 03: Electrosphere (Other Formats) (In-game data)

ACCREDITATION
screenshots by: Antare


0

#2 Guest_Ace of Aces_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 13 April 2008 - 12:58 PM

I find it quite funny how your RF-12A2 automatically stalls right at the start of the level.

Btw, which one d'you think the RF-12A2 is more based on? The YF-12 or SR-71? It has the -71's bodyframe but the codename is more like the -12's...plus some prototype -12s had weapons, the prototype -71s never had them.
0

#3 User is offline   Silber 6 

  • Wakka Wakka Wakka
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 654
  • Joined: 08-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cape Aubrey, Aurelia
  • Aircraft:F-4E Phantom II

Posted 30 April 2008 - 10:55 PM

actually, that's a good question AoA, it's more likely based on the SR-71 with only a few characteristics from the YF-12.
<img src="http://img295.imageshack.us/img295/7140/ltcolspartandrosigme1.png" border="0" class="linked-sig-image" />
"Feelin's? Look, mate, you know who has a lot of feelin's? Blokes what bludgeon their wife to death with a golf trophy. Professionals have standards: be polite, be efficient, have a plan to kill everyone you meet."
-The Sniper, Team Fortress 2

"Heroes who shed their blood and lost their lives! You are now lying in the soil of a friendly country. Therefore rest in peace. There is no difference between the Johnnies and Mehmets to us where they lie side by side here in this country of ours. You, the mothers, who sent their sons from far away countries wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well."
-Mustafa Kemal Autaturk, President of Turkey.
0

#4 User is offline   Green Giant 

  • Yellow Squadron Commander
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 1,910
  • Joined: 03-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere between here and there....
  • Aircraft:What ever is best for the mission
  • Squadron:The Yellow Squadron

Posted 01 May 2008 - 04:48 PM

Well since the YF-12 is based on the SR-71 and there are only a few minor differences with the Airframe, it wouldn't make too much of a difference..
*Former Director of the ES 2.0 Media Team*
*Commander of the Yellow Squadron*

Posted Image
0

#5 User is offline   PhantomPhanatic 

  • Airman
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 51
  • Joined: 20-April 08

Posted 01 May 2008 - 09:48 PM

QUOTE (Ribbon-Crimson @ May 1 2008, 12:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well since the YF-12 is based on the SR-71 and there are only a few minor differences with the Airframe, it wouldn't make too much of a difference..


The A-12 was actually designed first, the YF-12 came next, then the RS....err....SR-71. The YF-12 didn't have nose chines like the SR-71 so it appears that the YF-12 in this game seems to either be based off the SR-71 or an iteration of the YF-12 that incorporated the chines from the SR-71. Since the YF-12 was originally slated as an interceptor, any iteration of the SR-71 used for such purposes would most likely be called an F-12 anyway. Also, something I learned recently was that most of the original designs for the A-12 incorporated canards in the configuration, a fact I found quite interesting as Namco used them in their version.


0

#6 User is offline   Ribbon-Rena 

  • ES Resident Lurker
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Administrators
  • Posts: 1,273
  • Joined: 05-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Electrosphere
  • Aircraft:F-16C B50+

Posted 02 May 2008 - 02:35 PM

Ain't A-12 tandem? I once saw a tandem RS-71 / A-12, which one's it?
QUOTE (Ribbon-Blue)
But I'm afria of the backwars 'b' button! D:


The Colorless One.. Almost became -Aqua, if Mr. Blue approves it, which he didn't
NOTE: 1. Sig too huge will be reminded, and warned, and moved
NOTE: 2. Necroposting is not illegal, if not done excessively and meaninglessly..
0

#7 Guest_Excalibur_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 03 May 2008 - 06:22 AM

I believe what you're thinking of is the M-21/D-21 motherplane/drone.
0

#8 User is offline   PhantomPhanatic 

  • Airman
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 51
  • Joined: 20-April 08

Posted 09 May 2008 - 04:06 AM

Actually the SR-71B was.

link--> SR-71B <--


0

#9 User is offline   Demon Lord Razgriz 

  • Dalek Emperor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Contributors
  • Posts: 1,414
  • Joined: 12-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Crucible
  • Aircraft:Dalek Saucer

Posted 09 May 2008 - 04:31 AM

All SR-71s are tandom, the second seat is set right behind the first so there is less drag. It was for the camera operator or co-pilot.

You can see the window to the second seat just pass the front cockpit windows.

YOU WILL BE EXTERMINATED!!
0

#10 User is offline   PhantomPhanatic 

  • Airman
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 51
  • Joined: 20-April 08

Posted 09 May 2008 - 04:48 AM

True, but I think what he meant was the obvious second cockpit protrusion on the SR-71B.


0

#11 User is offline   Demon Lord Razgriz 

  • Dalek Emperor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Contributors
  • Posts: 1,414
  • Joined: 12-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Crucible
  • Aircraft:Dalek Saucer

Posted 09 May 2008 - 05:09 AM

The -B model I believe was the trainer verison. I'll need to check.

EDIT: I was correct, the -B model is a trainer verison, 2 SR-71Bs were built and a 3rd was planed but in 1968, then-Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, allegedly because of USAF's and Congress' preference for an F-12B interceptor version over his preferred option of using F-111s as interceptors, had the highly-specialized and advanced tooling used in manufacturing the SR-71 ordered to be destroyed.
YOU WILL BE EXTERMINATED!!
0

#12 User is offline   Grastens 7 

  • Nureyev On Ice
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 1,196
  • Joined: 13-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa, Ontario
  • Aircraft:1999 Mercedes-Benz CLR
  • Squadron:... Spyker?

Posted 09 May 2008 - 11:52 PM

QUOTE (Ace of Aces @ Apr 13 2008, 08:58 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Btw, which one d'you think the RF-12A2 is more based on? The YF-12 or SR-71? It has the -71's bodyframe but the codename is more like the -12's...plus some prototype -12s had weapons, the prototype -71s never had them.

I think the RS-71, or the A-12 otherwise. This earlier version was not fully adapted to the unarmed reconnaissance role, and thus weapons could be fitted to the craft with the same degree of effectiveness that the RF-12A2 has. Looking at the picture too, the airframe looks a bit different from the SR-71, and not just due to alterations for weapons... note the chines and the rear rudders.
Posted Image
0

#13 User is offline   PhantomPhanatic 

  • Airman
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 51
  • Joined: 20-April 08

Posted 10 May 2008 - 05:47 AM

QUOTE (Demon Lord Razgriz @ May 9 2008, 01:09 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The -B model I believe was the trainer verison. I'll need to check.

EDIT: I was correct, the -B model is a trainer verison, 2 SR-71Bs were built and a 3rd was planed but in 1968, then-Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, allegedly because of USAF's and Congress' preference for an F-12B interceptor version over his preferred option of using F-111s as interceptors, had the highly-specialized and advanced tooling used in manufacturing the SR-71 ordered to be destroyed.


Think of it this way, if the F-12 made it into production, the F-14 may not have been.....the F-111 used as an interceptor was the basis for the original F-14 design. The F-111 was just too heavy and sluggish for use as an interceptor.

Truthfully, the RF-12A2 should have been much more maneuverable. The chines on the SR-71 worked very well as LEXs and kept quite a good bit of reliable airflow over the wings at high alpha. The only problem was you couldn't go over a few G's since the intakes were very sensitive to angle of attack of the incoming air due to the use of high Mach intake spikes. Some modifications could have provided a much more reliable intake design at higher angles of attack, but the design parameters were never considered for a craft that could maneuver so well. It was assumed the SR-71 would be traveling at low angles of attack at all times to reduce intake complexity.

Bah, I ramble.....I recently found a declassified operating handbook for the SR-71, a very cool read indeed.

--> Blackbird Manual <--

-=edit=-

Yay! Colored links! I don't have to --> my links anymore <--


0

#14 Guest_Excalibur_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 10 May 2008 - 10:43 AM

Well, that certainly looks like an Air Force TO. Some parts seem a little fishy, though.
0

#15 User is offline   PhantomPhanatic 

  • Airman
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 51
  • Joined: 20-April 08

Posted 10 May 2008 - 03:43 PM

QUOTE (Excalibur @ May 10 2008, 06:43 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Well, that certainly looks like an Air Force TO. Some parts seem a little fishy, though.


What seems fishy? I have a friend that is currently an Aerospace engineer that uses this quite often in his research. It is scanned directly from the source and has information that very few people would know. There are still 10 pages that are classified regarding the synthetic aperture radar and systems that were aboard the SR-71. It's pretty crazy just to find out that the SR-71 had a synthetic aperture radar in at least 1986, and perhaps earlier.....


0

#16 User is offline   Grastens 7 

  • Nureyev On Ice
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 1,196
  • Joined: 13-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa, Ontario
  • Aircraft:1999 Mercedes-Benz CLR
  • Squadron:... Spyker?

Posted 05 September 2008 - 09:33 PM

Corrections made to grammar and spelling.
Posted Image
0

#17 User is offline   JianDaoXiao 

  • penetration
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 1,945
  • Joined: 10-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Perú
  • Aircraft:Fenrir

Posted 11 October 2008 - 03:01 AM

RF-12A2 Blackbird II blueprints

My Love
---->Daniita<----
0

#18 User is offline   Antare 

  • Elite Airman
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Adv. Contributors
  • Posts: 272
  • Joined: 13-June 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 December 2008 - 07:18 AM

Added stats pic.
0

#19 User is offline   Scarface tfs 

  • lol?
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 479
  • Joined: 12-April 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England
  • Aircraft:EE Lightning F.6

Posted 20 December 2008 - 07:30 PM

QUOTE (Ace of Aces @ Apr 13 2008, 12:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I find it quite funny how your RF-12A2 automatically stalls right at the start of the level.


Thats because it was just released from the rocket boosters.
"Woah!"Me recieving new sig from Reynard Fox. Thanks Rey!


"Its time for you to dance with the ang...." *shotgun blast*

0

#20 Guest_alax_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 30 May 2009 - 04:25 PM

QUOTE (Ace of Aces @ Apr 13 2008, 01:58 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I find it quite funny how your RF-12A2 automatically stalls right at the start of the level.

Btw, which one d'you think the RF-12A2 is more based on? The YF-12 or SR-71? It has the -71's bodyframe but the codename is more like the -12's...plus some prototype -12s had weapons, the prototype -71s never had them.


the SR-71 Was Developed from the A-12 Interceptor

QUOTE (PhantomPhanatic @ May 1 2008, 10:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The A-12 was actually designed first, the YF-12 came next, then the RS....err....SR-71. The YF-12 didn't have nose chines like the SR-71 so it appears that the YF-12 in this game seems to either be based off the SR-71 or an iteration of the YF-12 that incorporated the chines from the SR-71. Since the YF-12 was originally slated as an interceptor, any iteration of the SR-71 used for such purposes would most likely be called an F-12 anyway. Also, something I learned recently was that most of the original designs for the A-12 incorporated canards in the configuration, a fact I found quite interesting as Namco used them in their version.


thats pretty much exactly right
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


Enter your sign in name and password


Sign in options
  Or sign in with these services