MIG 25 SPEED

[Lt. James Cater 62]

In other places on the web there is a bunch of info concerning SR-71s/MIG25s.

 

Needless to say, the usual conclusion is that a Foxbat would have to fly an almost perfect intercept to get a Blackbird.

[+Gepard 11,289]

The trick over the baltic sea was, that the SR-71 had to pass avery small corridor between swedish and east german/polish airspace. The MiG-25PD were started at Eberswalde Finow and were directed to the best point of intercept. So they reached nearly everytime perfect intercept positions 1.3 km behind the SR-71. In the Kola penisula area (Murmansk) the MiG-25 had only a very small chance to intercept a Blackbird, but also in this area the Blackbird was intercepted.

 

Jug mentioned the MiG-25 of Belenko, but the MiG-25PD was a major step foreward.

Edited September 5, 2008 by Gepard

[az12121 0]

Here's nice video about MiG-25.

This film (it's from 1981) was a part of Soviet propaganda.

Here is link:

http://pl.youtube.com/watch?v=0oSgHCXA7wk&...feature=related

Edited September 5, 2008 by az12121

[column5 63]

The trick over the baltic sea was, that the SR-71 had to pass avery small corridor between swedish and east german/polish airspace. The MiG-25PD were started at Eberswalde Finow and were directed to the best point of intercept. So they reached nearly everytime perfect intercept positions 1.3 km behind the SR-71. In the Kola penisula area (Murmansk) the MiG-25 had only a very small chance to intercept a Blackbird, but also in this area the Blackbird was intercepted.

 

Ah I see. What they are calling an "intercept" is really just positioning the MiG in a certain place they think would be effective based on a peacetime mission profile. That's a crafty bit of semantics.

[sunliner 0]

Keep in mind that the only air to air kill the Iraqi AF got against the US was a MiG-25 which hosed down a bug (Hornet). The AVG proved time and again that it is the driver, not the jet that wins the fight.

 

That engagement proved that luck is an even bigger factor. The Foxbat slid up behind a jet that was flying straight and level, and apparently had multiple threat warning system malfunctions. Popped off a missile before shagging ass away from the other aircraft who were trying to get him. There was no maneuvering involved, and the Hornet driver likely never knew what hit him. By all accounts, Spike was a helluva stick and likely could have dusted the raghead in a dogfight.

But it was a kill either way...and I remember reading where at least one fighter pilot has used the phrase "I'd rather be lucky than good".

 

Of course, I heard that there were other theories that said that Spike's Hornet was shot down by either an F-15 or an F-14 that was attempting to target the Foxbat. I'm not sure anything was ever proven, or released to the public if it was.

-Mike

[jaeger_301 0]

lets say the article is correct.

 

but this raises the question why the russians actually didnt shoot down the SR71???

 

Where they not willing to do so?

Nah, the history shows us that they russians where always trigger happy and did not hesitate to shoot at suspect planes- see the U2 and the Korean 747. And keep in mind what propaganda victory this would be, just take a look what happend as the F117 was shot down over serbia.

 

Where they able to do so?

i think thats the point, they werent able to shoot the SR71 down. There are a lot of what if, some of them:

-the SR71 and accelarated over mach 3.2

-the SR71 climbed much much higher

-did successfully jam the MIG 25 radar

-the MIG 25 couldn t get a fire solution, because of above and other reasons

 

lets get back to the facts, there was never a SR71 shot down and the russians where willing to do so - anytime.

 

Jaeger

[+ST0RM 145]

What - The Sun wrote an article claiming that a Sopwith Camel could intercept an SR-71 no probs - shirley thats true

 

Oh yea, if it's in the mags or on the net, it's gotta be true.

 

Here's another jewel:

Click me

 

Jeff

[Fubar512 1,350]

Oh yea, if it's in the mags or on the net, it's gotta be true.

 

Here's another jewel:

Click me

 

Jeff

 

Why, we have those in NJ, too....we really do...I've seen them!!!!

[+Gepard 11,289]

lets say the article is correct.

 

but this raises the question why the russians actually didnt shoot down the SR71???

 

Where they not willing to do so?

Nah, the history shows us that they russians where always trigger happy and did not hesitate to shoot at suspect planes- see the U2 and the Korean 747. And keep in mind what propaganda victory this would be, just take a look what happend as the F117 was shot down over serbia.

 

 

lets get back to the facts, there was never a SR71 shot down and the russians where willing to do so - anytime.

 

Jaeger

 

 

The answer is simply. The SR-71 never violated soviet airspace dramatically, as the U-2 had done and the KAL-007 Jumbo had done twice. There are a lot of examples of shot down US planes and all of them were shot down deep into soviet airspace or allied airspace.. The US was not foolish enough to risk the Blackbird in deep penetration recon missions.

In international airspace the soviets fired no single round. It would have been an act of war, they shoot only in their airspace, as an act of selfdefence.

Edited September 6, 2008 by Gepard

[Fubar512 1,350]

The answer is simply. The SR-71 never violated soviet airspace dramatically, as the U-2 had done and the KAL-007 Jumbo had done twice. There are a lot of examples of shot down US planes and all of them were shot down deep into soviet airspace or allied airspace.. The US was not foolish enough to risk the Blackbird in deep penetration recon missions.

In international airspace the soviets fired no single round. It would have been an act of war, they shoot only in their airspace, as an act of selfdefence.

 

 

The SR-71s overflew Hanoi during the Vietnam war, and Havana throughout the cold war, with impunity. In the book "Skunkworks", by Ben Rich, there are a few anecdotal paragraphs regarding overflights of hostile territory, namely North Vietnam, where pilots regularly found themselves targeted by SA-2s. The SA-2s could not even come close to intercepting the SR-71s, exploding miles behind them, in their jet wake.

 

Then there was the D-21 drone, which drove the Chinese (and allegedly the Soviets as well) crazy, with fears of American Mach 4-capable stealth aircraft.

[jaeger_301 0]

The answer is simply. The SR-71 never violated soviet airspace dramatically, as the U-2 had done and the KAL-007 Jumbo had done twice. There are a lot of examples of shot down US planes and all of them were shot down deep into soviet airspace or allied airspace.. The US was not foolish enough to risk the Blackbird in deep penetration recon missions.

In international airspace the soviets fired no single round. It would have been an act of war, they shoot only in their airspace, as an act of selfdefence.

 

well Gepard, thats quite a valid point.

 

so the mission would be, fly along ddr, poland up to St. Petersburg make some turns and back and stay out of russia. i think the US could have done this with cheaper planes and more loiter time.

 

or did the SR71 flow up to murmansk inside russian territory?

then it was a major fault from the russian side that there wasn t a base on a location where they could reach the SR71 inside there territory.

 

Jaeger

[Sokol 444]

Hi folks,

 

Mig-25 vs SR-71: propably the single most disputed question in the community :-) and beaten to death in the net. any way, here are my 5 cents:

 

remember: the "blackbird" had to fly straight and level, more than anything else up there. being a really "hot" airplane it was a perfect target even for IR-missiles.

 

during the late 70ies and the 80ies SR-71 used to fly along the Soviet Baltic coastline. Almost every time the Blackbird left the Baltic a lone MiG-25 took off in the GDR and positioned itself 3 km behind and below the U.S.-spyplane as described by Gepard. Swedish (radar-)onlookers "were impressed by this precision".

 

doing some educated maths this would give the SR-71 crew some 15 seconds to leave their airplane before being hit by 70 kg of R-40 high explosives (in fact, they could not leave it due to the lack of a suitable escape system).

 

the MiG-31 was as fast as the -25 and featured the most advanced weapon-system of it's era. any doubts ?

 

To put a long story short: does anybody think the USSR did waste millions of roubles for just a glimpse or a blip on the radar screen ?

 

btw: at least 1 SR-71 was hit by a Sam-2 over vietnam, though not fatally (remember: it runs almost 1 km per second). overflights were suspended for a while, new defensive item installed, new routes seleczed and the high thread areas avoided.

 

as for the F-105 (vs MiG-21): although allegedly being the "fastest runner on the deck" it simply "was not match" for the MiG-21, which could out-accelerate and out-manoeuvre the Thud. the MiG had the offensive and defensice initative.

 

cheers

sokol

[+Dave 2,322]

btw: at least 1 SR-71 was hit by a Sam-2 over vietnam, though not fatally (remember: it runs almost 1 km per second). overflights were suspended for a while, new defensive item installed, new routes seleczed and the high thread areas avoided.

 

That is 100% false. No SR-71 was every hit by a SAM or ground fire. EVER.

[column5 63]

Its well known fact that for every aircraft developed in the West, the Russians developed a totally superior (in every way) counter.

[Fubar512 1,350]

In the North Vietnam incident you mentioned, the SA-2 was fired well ahead of the SR-71's flight path, and was command-detonated several thousand feet below and ahead of the aircraft. One small piece of shrapnel hit the airframe. The pilot did not even realize this until after the aircraft landed. And the though the NV overflights were temporarily suspended afterwords, it was not do to this. It was due to the fact that entire A-12 fleet was tasked with overflights of North Korea during the Pueblo incident.

 

Source: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa38...ag=artBody;col1

[+Dave 2,322]

I hate to disagree with you Ed but there are other sites that say it never hit by any enemy fire. Even here at the USAF Museum says it never was hit by any enemy fire.

[Fubar512 1,350]

"The work Lockheed engineers put in to make the A-12 and SR-71 survivable paid off. None were ever shot down, despite a reported 4,000 missile launches against them, and there is only one recorded hit: a small bit of shrapnel hit an A-12 on an early mission over North Vietnam. When the SR-71 was finally retired in 1997, 32 years after the first A-12 became operational, it was still the fastest manned, air-breathing airplane in the world. The A-12 and SR-71 were the first operational "stealth" aircraft, even though they did not depend entirely on reduced signatures to survive (as the later F- 117 and B-2 do). The first use of a deliberately reduced radar signature to improve survivability was on the A-12. "

[Lt. James Cater 62]

Hi folks,

 

Mig-25 vs SR-71: propably the single most disputed question in the community :-) and beaten to death in the net. any way, here are my 5 cents:

 

remember: the "blackbird" had to fly straight and level, more than anything else up there. being a really "hot" airplane it was a perfect target even for IR-missiles.

 

during the late 70ies and the 80ies SR-71 used to fly along the Soviet Baltic coastline. Almost every time the Blackbird left the Baltic a lone MiG-25 took off in the GDR and positioned itself 3 km behind and below the U.S.-spyplane as described by Gepard. Swedish (radar-)onlookers "were impressed by this precision".

 

doing some educated maths this would give the SR-71 crew some 15 seconds to leave their airplane before being hit by 70 kg of R-40 high explosives (in fact, they could not leave it due to the lack of a suitable escape system).

 

the MiG-31 was as fast as the -25 and featured the most advanced weapon-system of it's era. any doubts ?

 

To put a long story short: does anybody think the USSR did waste millions of roubles for just a glimpse or a blip on the radar screen ?

 

btw: at least 1 SR-71 was hit by a Sam-2 over vietnam, though not fatally (remember: it runs almost 1 km per second). overflights were suspended for a while, new defensive item installed, new routes seleczed and the high thread areas avoided.

 

as for the F-105 (vs MiG-21): although allegedly being the "fastest runner on the deck" it simply "was not match" for the MiG-21, which could out-accelerate and out-manoeuvre the Thud. the MiG had the offensive and defensice initative.

 

cheers

sokol

Concerning the F-105 vs MIG21 i think you might have to think again.

 

Look at it from this perspective...what were the aircraft designed to do and could each do the others job? Of course not. The big difference historically being that Thuds had a lot of Mig kills while MIG 21s weren't exactly useful at hauling heavy loads of ordnance.

 

The F-105 wasn't "allegedly" the "fastest runner on the deck". It WAS the fastest, common knowledge at the time. You can read accounts of Thunderchief pilots going as low as 30 ft while supersonic. Like i posted above, good luck catching me down there. In this sim i've been at times 700+kts at 50ft while egressing. Please explain how a MIG21 is going to get on my six and shoot me down?

[Fubar512 1,350]

Another interesting factoid, and one that's not commonly known, was that while the F-105 was significantly larger than the MiG-21, it had an even lower frontal RCS than the Fishbed. That wasn't by original intent, it simply serves to illustrate how aerodynamically clean the Thundercheif was.

[+Dave 2,322]

Another interesting factoid, and one that's not commonly known, was that while the F-105 was significantly larger than the MiG-21, it had an even lower frontal RCS than the Fishbed. That wasn't by original intent, it simply serves to illustrate how aerodynamically clean the Thundercheif was.

 

I saw a B-17 next to an F-105. They seemed like they were the same damn size.

[krgf15 1]

Im finally back on the internet after My PCS back to AK.

 

My two cents for this is that we might all find out who is better in the next few months if all this Georgia crap keeps up. My moneys on us. of course if my money was on russia, it would be like commiting suicide......

[kct 5]

They don't call the Thud huge for nothing. Then again, MOST of the fighter-bombers of that era looked huge in one way or another.

 

And MiGs. MOST, if not all, were designed as some kind of interceptor. That even lasted till the MiG-29.

Edited September 7, 2008 by kct

[Sokol 444]

Hi,

lacking time to respond to every mythological believe - only this:

 

the sam-2 has a lethal radius of some 50 - 60 m iirc, so no way that a shrapnel can travel several thousands feet. so it must have been a close call.

4.000 + missiles shot at the sr-71 without every hitting one: what a waste of money, all those general were surely shot.

proud sr-71s resting in museums: how many left ? what was the attrition rate of these really outstanding aircraft ? one third ? all operational, no doubt.

 

f-105 vs mig's: while the thud did achieve kills against mig-17, it did not stand a chance against the mig-21. not surprisingly, as the mig-21 was a fighter and no truck like the thud. as for the speed: mig's ran down "clean f-105s after they had dropped their bombs", says Marshal Michael (clashes), he should know.

 

sorry, guys. soviet designers knew their job as well as did u.s.-engineers.

 

cheers

sokol

[+Gepard 11,289]

The SA-2 was certainly no match for the SR-71. For this job the SA-5 was the waepon of choise and i the late 80th the SA-10 (S-300P).

 

And to the debated Hanoi SR-71 hit or no hit, i would say with the words of the korea war top ace Pepeljajew "Not all what is called a hit is really one."

The SR-71 is a myth. Its a very beautifull plane of excellent performance, now doubt. But it was not unvulnerable. The MiG-25 was a very beautifull plane too, but it could intercept the Blackbird only at nearly perfect circumstances. The MiG-25R could fly recon missions over Israel without israeli Phantoms and Hawks had a chance to intercept them. Such missions were flown in October 1973.

The MiG-31 was designed to counter the Cruise Missiles threat rather than the SR-71. Defend against the SR-71 was the job of the SAM, especially the SA-6 Gammon.

Edited September 7, 2008 by Gepard

[kct 5]

And then again, the MiG-25 was conceived as a high-speed interceptor in the first place. It just so happens that it is the fastest thing available to the Soviets too...