SR71 Astral Navigation ?
Moderator
Thread Starter
SR71 Astral Navigation ?
Last week I was privileged to attend the SETP symposium and oral history sessions in LA, and for those who missed it - my deepest commiserations, it was a remarkable event.
During the week, we had two presentations on the SR71's development, testing and operations. At one point one of the test pilots mentioned an "astral navigation" system which he said gave ?}120ft of track at cruise (M=3.2) speeds.
So the question to the house is - what was this remarkable piece of technology, how did it work, and why did we bother with GPS if it was really so good? (I'm guessing that at least part of the last answer is continuous sight of sky, but presumably not all of it.)
G
(Currently out of town)
During the week, we had two presentations on the SR71's development, testing and operations. At one point one of the test pilots mentioned an "astral navigation" system which he said gave ?}120ft of track at cruise (M=3.2) speeds.
So the question to the house is - what was this remarkable piece of technology, how did it work, and why did we bother with GPS if it was really so good? (I'm guessing that at least part of the last answer is continuous sight of sky, but presumably not all of it.)
G
(Currently out of town)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: USA
Age: 73
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One system used was and is an enhanced astral (astro [sic.]) tracker very similiar to that installed in the B-52's before inertial and GPS. Very, very, very simply put it locks onto a star or celestial pattern and tracks by angular offset which is summed with time and altitude and a few other things.
The system is needed for the SR-71 because the speed and altitude at which it operates can put it outside of the parameters needed to keep four or more satelites in "view" for GPS and DME slant range becomes essentially irrelevant.
Clouds have a highly adverse effect on its accuracy so the airlines wouldn't be interested even if it were available.
The system is needed for the SR-71 because the speed and altitude at which it operates can put it outside of the parameters needed to keep four or more satelites in "view" for GPS and DME slant range becomes essentially irrelevant.
Clouds have a highly adverse effect on its accuracy so the airlines wouldn't be interested even if it were available.
A navigator in a box! ... or an electronic sextant, perhaps??
We had quite a good astro navigation system in a V bomber I used to fly a while back. I't's performance depended on how much beer it had drunk the night before and whether it had new AAs in it's calculator !
The Apollo capsules used an astro-inertial system. The inertial gyros were run down while it was on a steady tradjectory and the astro tracking took over. the gyros were run up before any manouevreing.
The Apollo capsules used an astro-inertial system. The inertial gyros were run down while it was on a steady tradjectory and the astro tracking took over. the gyros were run up before any manouevreing.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: USA
Age: 73
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Manthrust
You missed my point. GPS wouldn't make sense due to the altitude and speed the plane flys enroute.
Option? GOK what the NASA and government dreamers are up to now.
I have no idea if it's currently installed. I haven't had any direct dealings for the last couple of years.
You missed my point. GPS wouldn't make sense due to the altitude and speed the plane flys enroute.
Option? GOK what the NASA and government dreamers are up to now.
I have no idea if it's currently installed. I haven't had any direct dealings for the last couple of years.
Given that the GPS constellation is some 11,000 miles up, I wouldn't have thought the SR-71s altitude would have made that much difference to "satellites in view', and the ionospheric refraction errors would probably be less... the speed factor is interesting though.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: USA
Age: 73
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The GPS takes the four strongest signals. At altitudes above 70K it may be confused by having six or more with equal strength and two or more may be very low on the horizon. The system gets what it sees as an impossible solution.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: North Wales
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The astro navigation system is really the only choice for future manned spaceflight. (outside earth orbit). And can be phenomenally accurate over short distance and longer distances. (Unless said star had some anomolay causing "wobble"
(I'm a bit of a geek on this, sorry!)
WF.
(I'm a bit of a geek on this, sorry!)
WF.
ENTREPPRUNEUR
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The 60s
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The GPS takes the four strongest signals. At altitudes above 70K it may be confused by having six or more with equal strength and two or more may be very low on the horizon. The system gets what it sees as an impossible solution.
There is a limit on altitude and speed for GPS but that is artificially mandated by the US Government to stop them being used for ballistic missiles. I suggest they might have made an exception for their own aircraft.
AFAIK aircraft receivers do not use signal strength to determine the optimum navigation solution - the satellite geometry is used. Satellites low on the horizon (good geometry/bad ionospheric errors) will be eliminated by the receiver mask angle. The more satellites in view, the better the integrity monitoring/FDE function.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All the discussion of GPS is interesting, but not really relevant for the SR-71 for most of its career. SR-71 first flight was December 1964, IIRC. 20+ years before GPS. Automated astral navigation, on the other hand, was developed for cruise missiles (like the Snark) starting in the mid fifties, and would have been a "mature" technology by 1964.
Last edited by Weight and Balance; 16th Oct 2003 at 10:30.
