militaryaircraft

‘I was controlling a westbound Concorde just entering my airspace when I received details of an SR-71 coming eastbound on a route that would conflict with Concorde,’ Pete Clarke, former ATC controller

Jointly developed and manufactured by Aérospatiale and the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC) under an Anglo-French treaty, the Concorde supersonic airliner was built in twenty samples including six prototypes and development aircraft. The aircraft entered service in 1976 and continued flying for the next 27 years.

With seating for 92 to 128 passengers, the Concorde had a top speed of Mach 2.04 (1,354 mph or 2,180 km/h at cruise altitude, over twice the speed of sound).

Air France (AF) and British Airways (BA) were the only airlines to purchase and fly Concorde.

The aircraft flew at a cruising altitude of 60,000 ft., from where passengers could see the curvature of the Earth. According to Aerotime.aero, in the same altitude bracket flew the US Air Force (USAF) SR-71 Blackbird spy plane. During the Cold War, pilots of the Concorde were asking air traffic control to move the SR-71 out of its way so it could proceed to New York’s JF as well as other destinations.

Pete Clarke, former air traffic controller (ATC) remembers in an interesting story appeared on ATC History titled Concorde in conflict with an SR-71 Blackbird;

‘If you type the above subject into your internet search it comes up with stories referring to a possible conflict between an Air France Concorde and an SR-71 which many doubt actually happened.

‘The following DID happen as I was the controller.

‘I have read an account from a Concorde captain on the BBC News site a few years ago who was being interviewed about Concorde after it had been taken out of service. He narrated this story as it was unique for it to be suggested Concorde could possibly be in conflict at the altitude it cruised.

‘There is also a documentary that has appeared on the “Quest” TV channel about the SR-71 Blackbird during which one captain relates this story from his perspective.

‘Here is my version.’

Flying between 55,000 to 60,000ft Concorde was above the subsonic jet aircraft. It was given this vertical profile of 5,000ft as the actual altitude the Concorde would level off at depended on the actual temperature on the day. This temperature could also vary during the crossing so the aircraft would adjust altitude accordingly. One or 2 executive jet aircraft could possibly reach 43,000ft on a good day but they were still not a problem to Concorde. On one particular day, however, I did control another aircraft that could more than match Concorde both in speed and altitude, the American military SR-71 Blackbird Mach 3+ spy plane. Sometimes military aircraft crossing the Atlantic would have a reserved route kept clear for them in order for formations of jets to refuel en-route, as necessary, from an accompanying tanker.

The SR-71 had more than sufficient range for the crossing and was operating solo. Although we would control many American subsonic aircraft like the C-141 or C-17 heavy cargo aircraft or maybe even troop carriers on our Track system they would not communicate with our HF radio station near Shannon. Instead they would use an American military HF radio station (Croughton) in Oxfordshire. Like most military units they had a regular change of staff so, generally, the radio operators had very limited experience of the operations they were handling. Keep it simple for them and it was OK. Anything out of the ordinary and it caused much confusion.

I was controlling a westbound Concorde just entering my airspace when I received details of an SR-71 coming eastbound on a route that would conflict with Concorde. The SR-71 did not always fly supersonically, it was doing less than Mach 1 on this day, but it was still at a very high altitude. I had been told it was “above 600”, i.e. above 60,000ft. Concorde was operating up to 60,000ft and the vertical separation standard at that altitude was 4,000ft.

I sent a message to the American radio operator to ask for the exact altitude of the SR-71. A few minutes later the answer came back, “Above 600.”

I telephoned the radio operator explaining I needed the exact altitude. The radio operator’s response was, “I’ll patch you through.” The operator had a facility to operate a 2-way switch on the radio. Push it one way and you could transmit over the telephone, switch it the other way to receive. At the end of each transmission you had to remember to say “Over’ in order for the radio operator to know when to flick the switch.

I was now talking directly to the pilot of the SR-71. “This is the Shanwick controller, confirm your altitude. Over.”

SR-71, “We are above 600. Over”

Me, “I need to know your exact altitude. Over”

SR-71, “Above 600. Over”.

Me, “Am I to understand you are unable to give me your exact altitude? Over”

SR-71, “Affirmative. Over”

(These aircraft had a stealth capability and could fly at very, very high altitude, often above 70,000ft. They did not, however want anyone to know exactly at what altitude they were flying so would switch off their radio signal that would indicate altitude to a radar operator once they climbed.)

Me, “OK, I have a Concorde operating westbound on a conflicting route with you at 60,000ft. I need 4,000ft vertical separation. Do I have it? Over”

SR-71, “You sure have.”

Me, “That’s all I need to know. Thanks. Out”

Just another little moment to brighten my day.

For more posts containing documents and photographic collections of UK Air Traffic Control check out ATC History.

Update: Linda Sheffield Miller has been reached out by former SR-71 Blackbird pilot David Peters who explained: ‘We never flew below Mach 3 at altitude except in the Baltic. Next if he didn’t know the altitude code he never talked to the airplane. The SR-71 did not fly well if at all below Mach 1 if above about 33,000 feet. If he was really a controller, he would have known that we turned off mode c on the transponder. To be in contact with the SR-71 he had to have a clearance so he would have had the base altitude and would have known that we reported altitude by base plus or minus. 99% of the time it would be plus. All you can do is shake your head.’

Photo by U.S. Air Force, Arthur Gibson, Spaceaero2 via Wikipedia, Air France and Adrian Meredith / Crown Copyright

‘This would be only the fellow’s third actual landing in an airliner. He’d had one good one and one not so good. This was going to be a demanding test for him and I was anxious to see how he handled it.’ Larry Durbin, Boeing 757 pilot

After flying the hot F-8 Crusader in the US Navy for a few years, I joined United Airlines. Now and then people ask if I had a scary or even memorable flight. In 33 years with United there were several, but my favorite took place on a windy, dark, and snowy night in Boston.

For four years I was a check pilot on the 757 and 767 for Captains and Copilots. On this night we were in a 757 and it was a new copilot, but that’s misleading: he was a former Air Force C-5 pilot. The C-5 is big, so I knew he wouldn’t be a problem and he wasn’t. This would be only the fellow’s third actual landing in an airliner. He’d had one good one and one not so good. This was going to be a demanding test for him and I was anxious to see how he handled it. I always told the new guys, and even the old guys if it was going to be a challenge, “If at any time in the approach you feel uncomfortable, tell me and I’ll finish the landing. If at any time I feel uncomfortable, I will tell you and I will finish the landing.” But it was a hollow threat because I never took the airplane away from a single pilot at United, although I had a couple of times when I gave them specific instructions, rather firmly.

An important detail for this story: on the approach page we used for landing in Boston, down at the bottom is a note: “On the south side of the airport is a deep-water channel.” I had seen it and wondered why I should care — it turned out to be important.

The snow wasn’t very heavy, but it was coming down. The wind wasn’t strong, but it was enough to make the approach very bumpy. That’s actually more important for the passengers than the pilots. Passengers tend to associate bumpy with scary or dangerous. It is neither.

We received instructions to land on runway 04 Right. There was a 04 Left, but it was being used for takeoffs. We broke out of the overcast at about 1,000 feet and had the runway in sight, which was a good feeling, but the tower came up and said, “There is a liquid nitrogen ship transiting the deep-water channel. You are prohibited from flying over this ship. You can either transition and land on 04 Left or go around for another approach to 04 Right.” We were 90 seconds to touchdown. My brain was saying I do not want to go around in this weather and make another approach, but I didn’t say that; I asked the copilot what he wanted to do. He said he’d take 04 Left. That made me happy, but he had some work to do in the next minute and a half. He made a gentle, descending swing to the left and brought the Boeing in for a perfect landing on 04 Left. I was very happy and relieved. He was going to pass the check ride for sure.

As we taxied to the gate, I set the brakes and told him I wanted him to immediately get his hat on and stand by the passenger door just outside the cockpit. I would shut the engines down and do the checklist. He asked if I was serious and I told him yes. After the last passenger deplaned, he came back into the cockpit laughing. He said every single passenger thanked him for getting them on the ground safely. I told him, “I didn’t want you to miss it. That’s the only time they don’t think we are overpaid.”

We went to the hotel and I told him change clothes and come back to the lobby in ten minutes. I was going to take him to the famous Cheers bar for a beer. Ten minutes went by, then fifteen, then twenty. I was beginning to wonder if Air Force guys were always late for appointments. Finally, he appears. I asked him, “Why so late?” He said, “Sorry, I had to call my wife and tell her about that landing.” That was okay with me.

The series of images in this article shows NASA’s X-59 as it sits on the flight line — the space between the hangar and the runway — at Lockheed Martin Skunk Works in Palmdale, California, on Jun. 19, 2023

The QueSST (Quiet SuperSonic Technology) for quiet supersonic commercial flight over land moves on to the next stage for NASA Aeronautics‘ X-59.

The aircraft moved to the space between the hangar and the runway which marks the start of a series of ground tests to ensure the X-59 is safe to fly.

Lockheed Martin says on its Facebook Page;

‘We moved the innovative aircraft to a run stall on the flight line for further ground testing, including vibration testing.

‘It is aiming to quiet the sonic boom and is one step closer to shaping the future of supersonic commercial flight travel.’

According to a NASA news release, this series of images shows NASA’s X-59 as it sits on the flight line — the space between the hangar and the runway — at Lockheed Martin Skunk Works in Palmdale, California, on Jun. 19, 2023. The move from its construction site to the flight line is one of many milestones that prepare the X-59 for its first and subsequent flights. Next up, the team will conduct significant ground tests to ensure the aircraft is safe to fly.

The X-59 aircraft—the centerpiece of NASA’s QueSST mission—is designed to demonstrate the ability to fly supersonic, or faster than Mach 1, while reducing the loud sonic boom to a quiet sonic thump.

The X-59 technology will be demonstrated when the X-plane flies over communities starting in 2024 when NASA will fly it over several communities to gather data on human responses to the sound generated during supersonic flight. NASA will deliver that data set to US and international regulators to possibly enable commercial supersonic flight over land.

This breakthrough would open the door to an entirely new global market for aircraft manufacturers, enabling passengers to travel anywhere in the world in half the time it takes today.

Photo by Lockheed Martin