PDA

View Full Version : Nasa's WB-57 takes to the air again after 41 years grounded.


NutLoose
10th Aug 2013, 21:00
You cannot keep a canberra down and NASA have just regenerated a third WB-57 to add to the fleet.

See link for more and stunning pictures.

NASA?s new WB-57F, N927NA, flies for the first time in 41 years | GAR (http://globalaviationresource.com/v2/2013/08/10/nasas-new-wb-57-n927na-flies/?fb_source=pubv1)

Herod
10th Aug 2013, 21:09
When the MRCA (Tornado eventually) was running further and further behind schedule, the acronym became Must Refurbish Canberras Again. I presume crosswind technique is crab; wing-down would be "interesting".

SASless
10th Aug 2013, 21:29
Something going on in the Sandbox we want to know about?


Martin/General Dynamics RB-57F Canberra - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin/General_Dynamics_RB-57F_Canberra)

smujsmith
10th Aug 2013, 22:03
Despite the antenna various, change of engine, there's just no mistaking the pedigree of this aircraft. Nice to know that not everything British is gone.

Smudge:ok:

plans123
10th Aug 2013, 22:15
Maybe these guys could tap NASA for some cash to help them...

http://www.facebook.com/pages/WJ574-Canberra-Restoration/122941504562143?ref=stream

Wander00
10th Aug 2013, 22:38
Nice to see the old lady airborne again - you cannot keep a good one down. Lot of dust in the air....................

LowObservable
10th Aug 2013, 22:40
Just remember it is a NASA asset being used for weather research.

http://area51specialprojects.com/u-2_photo_archive/u2a_naca.jpg

(Note in the haste to do the phony photo shoot without making it too obvious that the airbase didn't exist, someone seems to have installed the pogos backwards.)

SASless
10th Aug 2013, 23:23
Seems they never really quit flying.......as there were Ops out of Kbar and other places quite recently. (much less than 40+ years anyway).

NutLoose
10th Aug 2013, 23:41
Yes they have two current and have just added the third :)

RAFEngO74to09
11th Aug 2013, 00:19
Plenty of articles on the internet about the BACN equipment it can carry:

The Aviationist » NASA?s WB-57F BACN ?flying gateway? once again heading to Afghanistan (http://theaviationist.com/2013/02/08/wb57-heading-to-afghanistan/#.UgbZDvfn-M8)

Monster Machines: Why Are The Most Vital Aircraft In The USAF Arsenal Owned By NASA? | Gizmodo Australia (http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/02/why-are-the-most-vital-aircraft-in-the-usaf-arsenal-owned-by-nasa/)

For anyone that is interested, there is lots of info and some great pics on the official NASA website:

WB-57 Home (http://jsc-aircraft-ops.jsc.nasa.gov/wb57/index.html)

Departure from Mildenhall:

Martin WB57F Canberra NASA N926NA leaving Mildenhall 03/12/2012. - YouTube

Departure from Nellis AFB:

WB-57 departure at Nellis AFB - YouTube

Al R
11th Aug 2013, 00:33
Takin' off, looks like Angel of the North!

Nice to see.

SASless
11th Aug 2013, 00:53
Now I just have to pose a question......which need not be answered if One does not want the NSA, FBI, CIA, and IRS digging into your underwear.....but just what does the B-57 platform do that a modified Drone can not? If they can loiter a drone above the Battlefield for pushing 24 hours at a time....then it would follow it would be far cheaper, more effective, and not risk a two man crew to accomplish the mission.

The discuss a Camera Pod....but discuss Comm Node....which suggests there is some looking and talking going on....along with some photography and SigInt work too.

I have always felt one needs to consider known capabilities then figure out what niche isn't being covered.

I saw that first hand in Somalia when a very odd looking airplane got rolled out of a hangar by some folks who were not there. That added to the P-3, AC-130, and other assets that were there every night.

Official comments reported that particular kind of Airplane had gone out of service very shortly after Vietnam folded but what a surprise to discover it had not.

So....just what is NASA up to in Kandahar these days?

West Coast
11th Aug 2013, 01:23
Yup, that N registered King Aire always had my attention at Mog.

SASless
11th Aug 2013, 02:06
Wasn't the King Air.....but had a Bell 212 that worked with it....SAR backup. Hid in the old 160th Hanger.

MPN11
11th Aug 2013, 10:01
I recall a brief detachment of an RB-57F to Tengah in the late 60s, not least because it was at one of the Det parties that I met my first wife :(

Watching the takeoff was interesting - not on full power, presumably in case of singe engine failure, and then at about 500' the full-power climb at an incredible angle and relatively slow speed.

Nice to see the videos of an aircraft that lasted much longer than that marriage :cool:

Edit ... Just found a photo of it, whilst looking for something else!
https://picasaweb.google.com/britbrat1956/RAFTengah#5402097148533735922

Dengue_Dude
11th Aug 2013, 11:25
Not a lot of EE Canberra left in that methinks . . .

BEagle
11th Aug 2013, 11:37
Wasn't the King Air.....but had a Bell 212 that worked with it....SAR backup. Hid in the old 160th Hanger.

Something weird and wonderful, such as the Lockeed YO-3A?

SASless
11th Aug 2013, 13:46
Beags.....not sure it was an "A" model.

LowObservable
11th Aug 2013, 13:55
Oh, one of THOSE things. The ones that are not made in Switzerland, despite the name, nudge nudge wink wink.

Herod
11th Aug 2013, 15:37
Lovely videos - all noise and smoke.

JEM60
11th Aug 2013, 19:58
These aircraft quite regularly transit through R.A.F.Mildenhall, I video'd one there on at least two separate occasions some 5 years ago, and they have been back several times since.

BEagle
11th Aug 2013, 20:37
So was the aircraft, which wasn't operated by people who weren't there in Somalia, a Lockheed YO-3A Quiet Star?

West Coast
11th Aug 2013, 21:40
Not during my time there which was dec 92- june (I think) 93. There were some don't ask those guys any questions types, but during my time they were in EP-3'S a Kingaire and a few helo's.

SASless
11th Aug 2013, 22:42
If it wasn't.....it sure looked like one!


YO-3A (http://www.yo-3a.com)


Since it was outside the hanger in the daylight......I have to assume they did not care for people to know of their presence. The ramp was in direct observation from the high ground inland of the Airport. Actually....it was in direct fire from the high ground specifically the "Soap Factory". The Ramp was littered with spent rounds.

West Coast
12th Aug 2013, 01:22
Yes, I went ditch diving on many occasions when the local ruffians send rounds our way. SAS, what time frame was this aircraft there? I left long before the party ended.

SASless
12th Aug 2013, 01:49
Trick question.....uhm.....errrrr.....about mid-summer '94 as I recall.


South African friend, ex-RAF, accosted me one morning on the ramp....inquired why I walked off from him everytime he spoke to me. He thought perhaps he had offended me somehow I guess. Upon a moment's thought I realized what was going on....everytime he wanted to stand and talk while we were getting ready to fly....I would walk over behind a helicopter so it was between me and the Soap Factory.

When I told him what I was doing and to accept my apologies for giving him reason to question my relationship with him....he very smartly (British usage of the word...) stepped over to where I was.

Seems he got plugged once before in NI flying a Wessex.

Davef68
12th Aug 2013, 11:56
SASless - could it have been a Schweizer RG-8? (SA 2-37A). The CIA are reported to have used those.

SASless
12th Aug 2013, 12:52
It was a YO-3 for sure.

BEagle
12th Aug 2013, 12:53
RG-8A would seem more plausible than a YO-3A:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a341/nw969/RG-8A_zpsd5f5a240.jpg (http://s14.photobucket.com/user/nw969/media/RG-8A_zpsd5f5a240.jpg.html)

YG-8A

Or maybe it was an Auror...............aargh! Black Discovery outside....:uhoh:

SASless
12th Aug 2013, 13:05
Beags.....it may be more plausible to you....but I was there, in person, seen it with my own two eyes, and thus am far better suited to identify what was there in front of me. Do you not agree looking at the palm of your hand and guessing falls short of being there and seeing it?

Davef68
12th Aug 2013, 13:55
The NASA YO-3 was/is still around, but I presume that would be a bit high profile for Mogadishu at that time!

BEagle
12th Aug 2013, 14:09
So are you saying that it was the (NASA) YO-3A rather than the RG-8A? Your earlier post wasn't that clear to me.

zondaracer
12th Aug 2013, 14:18
There is a WB-57 being restored currently at KAPA. Last I saw it was still in green primer too.

SASless
12th Aug 2013, 14:37
Beags....I am saying it was a cleverly Camo'ed YO-3....who owned it I have no idea....there were no markings on it. The folks who ran it lived in a bunch of nice RV Trailers up on the dunes overlooking the Ocean and seemed to hold a lot of communion rituals each day. I reckon they were Christians who enjoyed action.

LowObservable
12th Aug 2013, 21:05
I think the YO-3As went on the surplus list after VN and went to a number of agencies. The Culinary Institute might have been interested in the potential of the special prop and drive system as a basis for a blender.

West Coast
12th Aug 2013, 23:53
YO-3A (http://www.yo-3a.com)

Ok, someones gonna have to go to the reunion and get the details.

SASless
13th Aug 2013, 00:08
I nominate City of Flight.....her beguiling charming smile could melt the coldest heart!

West Coast
13th Aug 2013, 01:13
Agreed! Off she goes...

NutLoose
5th Sep 2013, 22:38
The UK's sole flying Canberra PR9 BTW has lost it's hemp PR scheme and has been rolled out in the scheme she would have worn opon entering service..


Stunning

Aviation News: New colours for Midair Squadron?s Canberra PR9 XH134 / G-OMHD | GAR (http://globalaviationresource.com/v2/2013/09/04/aviation-news-new-colours-for-midair-squadrons-canberra-pr9-xh134-g-omhd/)

dragartist
7th Sep 2013, 20:04
Not sure if it would be more appropriate to start a new thread as the last dozen posts have not been about the B57.

Lots of chatter about smaller kites involved in supposedly similar tasks.

I think it was Beags who mentioned the thing not made in Switzerland.

I think he may refer to this:

Aurora Flight Sciences - Home (http://www.aurora.aero/)

Same was exhibited at Helitech at Duxford and some of the kit from it at DSEI last time.

I understand we had a few in the UK with Military registration and roundels for a while.

We have had a few similar things such as those assembled in Bembridge with strange lumps and bumps that have been recorded.

Drag

BEagle
7th Sep 2013, 20:09
I think it was Beags who mentioned the thing not made in Switzerland.

'twas not I! The Aurora to which I may or may not have made reference wasn't a black project of the US and hasn't ever flown from Machrihanish or Groom Lake. Neither does it fly at hypersonic speed.....

dragartist
7th Sep 2013, 20:43
Sorry Beagle It was Low Observable and I thought he was referring to the Diamond DA42. My Geography is rubbish. they are Austrian. I know nothing. We did have one operating out of Cambridge a while back. I think it was a pure civilian machine. I know they fly quite high.

Further digging shows it was discussed on PPRuNe in 2008

Back to the B57 Weather research machine should we?

LowObservable
8th Sep 2013, 18:51
Before anyone gets further confused, when I said something about "things that sound Swiss and are not", think what Swiss Germans call themselves...

Newforest2
9th Sep 2013, 07:14
Swizzers? :\

Schweizer Aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schweizer_Aircraft)

chopper2004
15th Mar 2014, 21:28
I took these shots late last year, sans markings :mad: and sans pressure suits :eek:

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/IMG_7435_zps864b431c.jpg

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/IMG_7438_zpscce36b0d.jpg

Cheers

awblain
15th Mar 2014, 22:01
what does the B-57 platform do that a modified Drone can not?

Cost little to acquire and operate.

Fly high(ish) with plenty of space and weight for custom instruments, while needing neither a satellite link like the Global Hawk nor incurring the high operating cost of their U2, which needs its hours saving for doing what it can do uniquely.

I don't think the air above Kandahar is of any more interest to NASA than the air above anywhere else, notwithstanding the cheeky U designation/civilian operation of the U2 from the 1950s.

thing
16th Mar 2014, 09:56
We did have one operating out of Cambridge a while back. I think it was a pure civilian machine. I know they fly quite high.

Are you referring to the DA42? If you're lucky you might see FL180 in one on a good day. Not pressurised either so you need tubes up the hooter.

Wander00
16th Mar 2014, 10:14
Just shows the huge development potential of the original Canberra airframe. Maybe we should see what could be done with any Canberra airframes lying around. just remember "MRCA".............................hat, coat, I'm going.........

chopper2004
1st Jul 2015, 11:30
Speaking of Djibouti, saw this on Helihub yesterday , and notice the nice piece of Swiss engineering parked next door?

cheers

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g209/longranger/Untitled_zpsnrlind40.jpg

ian16th
1st Jul 2015, 13:52
Have a look on Google Earth at:

34°35'14.71"N 32°59'9.25"E

The image date purports to be 2015!

GlobalNav
1st Jul 2015, 15:17
You, sir, are observant!

Let's see, NASA research in the Mediterranean. Yeah.
Hmmm, global warming in Syria?

KenV
1st Jul 2015, 15:35
Now I just have to pose a question.....just what does the B-57 platform do that a modified Drone can not? The drone with the closest performance to the WB-57F Canberra is the RQ-4 Global Hawk (and its derivatives). It carries a 2000 lb sensor payload to 60,000 ft. The Canberra carries a 6000 lb sensor payload to 70,000 ft. Also, the nature of the Global Hawk design makes sensor integration complicated and limits aperture size/placement for those sensors. The Canberra carries its sensor package in a flexible "pallet" with much more flexible aperture size and location. This means highly "custom" sensor packages can be fitted and integrated quickly and (relatively) easily. The Canberra's engines are also capable of producing far more electrical power than the Global Hawk's. This additional power is required for some of the highly customized sensor packages. The Canberra has a two man crew. Having the sensor operator "in situ" can be highly advantageous (or outright required) in many scenarios. And finally, being crewed, the Canberra can fly anywhere at anytime, including commercial airspace, in and out of commercial airports. and over highly populated areas. Drones are limited to where they can fly. And it is a (relatively) simple task to deploy a Canberra over long distances anywhere. It is VERY complicated to deploy an unmanned drone (and its large logistic/command and control tail) over long distances to many places.

GlobalNav
1st Jul 2015, 15:40
At KenV: Thank you for the excellent insights.

Glad to see this beautiful airplane being used productively by our "NASA" pilots.

Not to hijack the thread, but to add on to KenV's points, the very reason why it was dumb as dirt to retire the SR-71, and thinking it could be replaced by an unmanned vehicle.

WASALOADIE
1st Jul 2015, 19:03
Ian16th

I think that shape may be another aircraft.

Whilst it has not been widely admitted, it has been based in that location for a considerable amount of time.

That aircraft has a different tailplane shape to the Nasa aircraft.

A southern Irish rock band shares the same name as the aircraft in your post. Goes by the nickname of "Dragon Lady"

P6 Driver
1st Jul 2015, 19:08
A southern Irish rock band shares the same name as the aircraft in your post.

You could just write U2 and have done with it!


(Ooops!)

ian16th
1st Jul 2015, 20:01
I think that shape may be another aircraft.

Ja, well, no, when I was last there, we had B15's, B16's and PR9's.

barnstormer1968
1st Jul 2015, 22:04
To offer an alternative viewpoint to Ken V's technical post:

The difference is the WB57 can do the task with style and looks a lot nicer.
It's still a Canberra after all (well, kind of).

LowObservable
1st Jul 2015, 22:36
It's a weather balloon....

ORAC
2nd Jul 2015, 06:10
Nobody mention the B15 bomber.......

vp_WfB2yKD4

gr4techie
2nd Jul 2015, 09:36
Plenty of articles on the internet about the BACN equipment it can carry:

The Aviationist » NASA?s WB-57F BACN ?flying gateway? once again heading to Afghanistan

Monster Machines: Why Are The Most Vital Aircraft In The USAF Arsenal Owned By NASA? | Gizmodo Australia

For anyone that is interested, there is lots of info and some great pics on the official NASA website:

WB-57 Home


Keeping one of those loitering looks like an expensive way to have a radio repeater. (If that's what it's really doing?)

You think it would be cheaper to have a common comms standard that works between platforms.

Talking of expensive flights, I always wondered how much avtur the continuous B-52 Chrome Dome missions went through?

msbbarratt
24th Nov 2015, 05:37
They've just sent all three examples up for a fly-around Houston:

Three high-flying birds soar together for the first time since the 1970s | Ars Technica UK (http://arstechnica.co.uk/science/2015/11/three-high-flying-birds-soar-together-for-the-first-time-since-the-1970s/)

Canberra - the aircraft that has been too useful to die for a veeery long time now!

Just as a matter of interest, just how expensive would it be thesedays to build something like that (or indeed the original) new? I don't mean load it up with massively expensive electronics, or design a whole new engine for ultimate performance. I simply mean build an airframe that looks the same, add the modern equivalent engines and a modicum of up-to-date avionics. Am I being cynical or would most of the money be lost to paperwork, political arguments, contract arrangements and set up time rather than actual metal cutting and joining?

ORAC
24th Nov 2015, 05:56
If you mean performance wise, Rutan did, it's called the Proteus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scaled_Composites_Proteus). Even if it looks a might uglier......

http://www.aviastar.org/pictures/usa/rutan_proteus_2.jpg

http://www.air-and-space.com/20051210%20Mojave/DSC_2348%20Scaled%20Composites%20281%20Proteus%20N281PR%20fr ont%20landing%20m.jpg

drewski429
11th Jan 2016, 21:05
My internal company newsletter (DynCorp Int'l) announced that the rebuild contract for delivery of one WB-57 is complete. All three made a formation presentation over Houston after the customer took custody of the aircraft from our hangar. Godspeed, NASA!

For a 70 year old aircraft, it didn't take a whole lot of modification to add power, reassemble and retrofit new tech. It was literally pulled straight from "celebrity row" in Tuscon after having sat there for 40 years. Some of you have stood in front of the old 927 as a museum piece!!

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8523/8529834121_36e14b5fb8.jpg

https://www.flickr.com/photos/dyncorpintl/sets/72157662364087972

https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa2explore/sets/72157660882028929

When DynCorp Int'l sent me to Afghanistan from 2010-2011, I observed 928 operating out of KAF, parked in the CIA hangar at the end of the runway if it wasn't taking off. This new variant has advanced battlefield imagery systems, and serves as a long-range data hub "overlord" which is why a flight path is almost routinely loops over loops over a predetermined combat sector.

sandiego89
12th Jan 2016, 13:19
Drewski429 It was literally pulled straight from "celebrity row" in Tuscon after having sat there for 40 years....

Welcome Drewski, I note two long wing WB-57's and six "short wing" B-57's still at the boneyard. Is it safe to assume that these short wing aircraft are kept specifically as spares for the NASA birds? I cant' think of any other reason to keep them. Obviously the wings would be of no use for NASA, but perhaps other items.

A recent google shot showing six B-57's (and two WB's):
https://www.google.com/maps/@32.1612093,-110.8372797,19z/data=!3m1!1e3

Lonewolf_50
12th Jan 2016, 13:29
My internal company newsletter (DynCorp Int'l)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa2explore/sets/72157660882028929

I note from this link a photo of a TW-4 based T-6B Texan II. TW-4 is where I got my start flying back about 1980-81. Please check your PM's.

Martin the Martian
12th Jan 2016, 13:34
I imagine the first Canberra 3-ship since the PR.9s flew into Kemble in 2006?

Valiantone
12th Jan 2016, 16:42
A photo here

AMARG Part III: The Aerial View ? FighterControl ? Home to the Military Aviation Enthusiast (http://www.fightercontrol.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=124095&sid=04cdf8ca6fbd154b3b4c9c54725b3213)

Shows an ex NASA bird in one of the scrapyards outside DMs perimeter. presumably held back for spares

There were three airframes flying in the late 90s and one was being used by NOAA for a while. assume it (might be) this one?

V1

wub
12th Jan 2016, 16:45
Sandiego89:

There is a 3rd WB in that image....:8

sandiego89
12th Jan 2016, 19:50
wub Sandiego89:

There is a 3rd WB in that image....:8

You mean the one by herself south of the road- down by the "737"/T-43 and the T-38's?

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.1543781,-110.8372663,20z/data=!3m1!1e3

She looks more complete than the other two.


I also spot another short wing B-57 on "celebrity row"

https://www.google.com/maps/@32.1709759,-110.8505861,20z/data=!3m1!1e3

wub
12th Jan 2016, 20:20
That's the one. I could spent hours analysing this image, so many types, fascinating.

NutLoose
12th Jan 2016, 22:37
Heck, when put beside a 737 it really brings home the size of that wing, in fact the overall size of the Canberra full stop, you wouldn't guess the length of one in the flesh standing beside it. What are the light trainers behind it?

.

JimNtexas
12th Jan 2016, 23:25
This looks to be the Air Training Command parking area except for the B-57. The 737 is probably a T-43, which was used for navigator training from about 1973 through ~2000.

The small trainers in the rear are T-37 'Tweets', which was the primary USAF pilot training aircraft for generations. These have been replaced by T-6 Texans. Off to the side are T-38s, still used for advanced pilot training..

West Coast
13th Jan 2016, 00:06
Surprised to see a C20/GIII in storage. Seems like that could have life with another govt agency with hush kits.

SkyHawk-N
13th Jan 2016, 06:20
Here (http://www.amarcexperience.com/ui/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=205&Itemid=274) is an up-to-date summary of what is at the Boneyard.

Nige321
13th Jan 2016, 12:00
Interesting list.

Anyone know why there's a single 'Panavia Tornado' in there...??

bluetail
13th Jan 2016, 12:06
The Tornado is German it was one of those based at Holloman, and there were once two in storage, the other one is now in the nearby Pima County Museum

Valiantone
13th Jan 2016, 13:35
From what I recall the Germans put the pair into DM as a trial, for a few years. Although I can't remember how long it was intended to last. Or weather they really planned to put more in.

However I believe that them being in storage meant they missed some mods the rest of the German fleet got. And as a result I think the trial was eventually abandoned. In a similar DM thread on Phantoms by the poster on my other reply.

They also have an long spares recovered F-4F out there as well

As for the list of inmates even with Windows 10 and downloading the 7zip thing I can't read them!!

V1

Not_a_boffin
13th Jan 2016, 15:12
If you just want the different types in there, use the database / current inventory / aircraft type tab.

If it's the actual frame numbers that's something else.....

Valiantone
13th Jan 2016, 20:08
Its for a friend who likes the type.

Sadly we can't do MRCA anymore :{

V1

Two's in
2nd Aug 2020, 19:18
WB-57 providing all the air-to-air shots of the Spacex Dragon capsule re-entry into the Gulf of Mexico today. Somebody thought it was a good stable high altitude platform for today's job.

atakacs
2nd Aug 2020, 19:23
I really had to double check when I heard it in the live feed.

Amazing

balsa model
3rd Aug 2020, 04:55
IIRC, after Columbia mishap, and before the resumption of flights, NASA wanted to have a really good recordings of what's falling and hitting what, during the launch. Presumably, without pre-conditions for cloud layers etc. that a ground telescope would impose. WB-57 with side-looking camera was the answer. Apparently the thing has an air-conditioned equipment bay in the nose so that the payloads can be swapped as needed. An auxiliary equipment, from the company that I work for, went along - so that's how I learned about it. Made us all feel very special :)

RAFEngO74to09
3rd Aug 2020, 23:02
Looking good !

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6SBT-z1DcM

tartare
3rd Aug 2020, 23:14
Great vid.
Presume that's Houston they're flying over?

fitliker
4th Aug 2020, 03:28
Could they not re-engine , re-wire , and re-use some Avro Vulcan aircraft . Those are awesome versatile machines as well .

treadigraph
4th Aug 2020, 05:25
I noticed a NASA WB-57 on ADSB out of Mildenhall a few years ago, it was heading towards Strumble and back across the Atlantic.

India Four Two
4th Aug 2020, 08:01
Presume that's Houston they're flying over?

Definitely Houston - I used to live there.

ORAC
4th Aug 2020, 08:59
Fitliker,

Only if they wanted to accept a dramatic reduction in aircraft ceiling.

They need a replacement they could order a couple of Scaled Composite Proteus. Ceiling with 50% fuel was already in the FL 650+ region. Then for the NASA Crystal-FACE program they fitted it with 13.5ft wing extensions.......


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1549x1041/image_f97ea7f039592ce8beedb8e0e477540eac1d540f.jpeg