Author Topic: Mig25 mach 3 capable? (Read 10458 times)

Boroda · « **Reply #30 on:** January 30, 2004, 11:25:15 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
I can tell you they TRIED to intercept the SR several times during one month I spent flying RC's in the Sea of Okhotsk in the late '70's.

They failed. Given the speed of the SR, the reaction time, the Mig's ability and the range of the A2A missiles, they never got it done. Despite missile shots taken when at their max altitude, the SR never had a problem with the MiG-25.

Wing with the SR at altitude and at speed? Possible probably in theory but never in an antagonistic setting in RL.

True.

Legends say that MiG-25 pilots in the North knew SR pilots by names and even chatted like friends. Other legends (that I don't believe) say that some guy refused to shoot at SR because he knew the pilot.

Other legends are that there were one or two SRs shot down in the Arctic, 25s were used as hounds and led SRs to a range of an undiscovered S-200 SAM. S-200 crew is supposed to deploy to a working condition from wheels in 14 hours - but I don't know anyone who will even try it. Anyway it's an adventure not worth shooting one enemy scout plane over tundra, and not even mentioning it in propaganda purposes like Powers U-2.

Please notice that SRs were used mostly in the areas not filled with aircraft defence. If it could dare to fly over Leningrad or Murmansk - it could last for no more then five minutes.

Toad · « **Reply #31 on:** January 30, 2004, 11:29:09 AM »

Review the use of Soviet designed aircraft vs US designed aircraft in the various Middle East conflicts.

Toad · « **Reply #32 on:** January 30, 2004, 11:35:35 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Boroda
Other legends are that there were one or two SRs shot down in the Arctic, 25s were used as hounds and led SRs to

I'd seriously doubt this one and probabl say "Not true".

I have a pretty good working knowledge of how Recon flight planning is done.

Suffice it to say that 25's didn't lead or chase the SR's anywhere. The route was planned beforehand and followed. If for some reason the route could not be followed (like an intercept), the contingency routings were already planned out and would take an SR away from potential threat areas, IE: overwater in International Airspace.

Bad form, even back in the "bad old days", to shoot down the other guy's airplane in International Airspace.

Toad · « **Reply #33 on:** January 30, 2004, 12:08:55 PM »

Kill / Loss Ratio:
Service

(From 1965 to March 31,1968 )

U.S. Navy 3.7 to 1

Air Force 3 to 1

1972 on

U.S. Navy 12.5 to 1

Air Force ~4 to 1

So? That one looks pretty clear to me.

Have any links for India V Pakistan? I haven't researched that one.

Toad · « **Reply #34 on:** January 30, 2004, 12:19:07 PM »

Found this:

After almost a year's of research, we at SAPRA INDIA believe that the losses of combat aircraft on both sides were as follows:

Combat Aircraft Losses
Description Pakistan India
Air to Air 19 19

Looks like a tie in 1971.

Dinger · « **Reply #35 on:** January 30, 2004, 12:21:51 PM »

okay Toad: Israel and US air forces against everyone else in the Middle East -- win for US hardware.
Soviet and French Iraqi Airforce against US-built Iranian Airforce: win for Soviet and French hardware.
Soviet and French Iraqi Airforce against US-built Kuwaiti Airforce,
win for the Soviet and French hardware.

Sure, you can argue the Iranians had imprisoned many of their pilots, and the US cut them off so they didn't have the spare parts they needed, and that the Kuwaitis had a dinky collection of Skyhawks.
But you could also argue that the "US victories" were top-of-the-line US-built aircraft and trained air crews against export-grade Soviet iron and undertrained pilots.
US hardware is impressive, and I believe most of it is the best in the world; but the Russian-built stuff is pretty damn good and a lot cheaper. Plus there's no worry about getting spare parts in the future.

Boroda · « **Reply #36 on:** January 30, 2004, 12:31:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
I'd seriously doubt this one and probabl say "Not true".

So do I. I said it's a legend and said why it's a legend from a "red" point of view.

Quote

Originally posted by Toad

I have a pretty good working knowledge of how Recon flight planning is done.

Suffice it to say that 25's didn't lead or chase the SR's anywhere. The route was planned beforehand and followed. If for some reason the route could not be followed (like an intercept), the contingency routings were already planned out and would take an SR away from potential threat areas, IE: overwater in International Airspace.

Bad form, even back in the "bad old days", to shoot down the other guy's airplane in International Airspace.

Thanks, intersting info. So - the only way to shoot it down was a SAM ambush, and it wasn't possible because S-200 (the only long-range SAM at that times) was too big and heavy, and could be easily spotted by sat recon.

Boroda · « **Reply #37 on:** January 30, 2004, 12:33:42 PM »

Hehe here we go again.

Israely losses data are doubtfull, but not as ridiculous as their kill numbers.

Also please add SAM kills. The result will be not in favour of American hardware.

Who'll be the first to tell me again that USAF lost only 79 Sabres in Korea? You are welcome

Vermillion · « **Reply #38 on:** January 30, 2004, 01:18:26 PM »

Gscholz, I'm pretty sure that the NVPAF didn't use the Su-7. MiG-17's, MiG-21's several varients, later on they had J-6's (MiG-19's), a couple of AN-2's, around 10 IL-28's, and some trainers. Never heard of any Su-7's.

Which kill numbers are you using? Toper.... (ah crap can't spell it from memory) the author from Bulgaria/Czechoslovakia who's written the books from the North Vietnamese perspective?

Even he admitts that those kill claims are somewhat inflated. If you compare the claims to the published American losses, you can pretty much cut them in half. Admittedly, you can almost do the same with the American claims. But just pointing it out.

In regards to this debate. While I agree the Soviet hardware was quite competitive up thru the mid 70's, their ability degraded greatly as the high tech hardware became more advanced and more prevalent.

gofaster · « **Reply #39 on:** January 30, 2004, 02:20:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GScholz (Image removed from quote.)

Here we see a shining example of the cause for the fall of the Soviet empire - they retired their MiG-25s for ultralights.

MC_Honky · « **Reply #40 on:** January 30, 2004, 02:46:40 PM »

I was a F-4 pilot in Vietnam. I flew out of Na Trang Air Base in the
Lo Mein valley in 1971. My squad achieved a 15:1 k/d ratio no problem. If we had to fly Commie iron we would been introuble. USA all the way.

Toad · « **Reply #41 on:** January 30, 2004, 03:36:32 PM »

No, I find it amazing the mighty USAF and USN achieved those kill ratios given the heavily restricted ROE imposed upon them.

Would've been interesting to see what the KR was had there been no restrictions.

Believe what you want to believe. If you want to see a minimal 3/1 KR as a victory for the NV forces, I surely don't care.

I kind of figured you'd handicap it somehow to show it in a different light.

How'd you like that 12/1 after the Navy's Top Gun program? Still a clear NV victory, eh?

senna · « **Reply #42 on:** January 31, 2004, 01:07:50 AM »

Anyways, I found some interesting information on the subject. Basically says what some of you experts above have stated that the mig-25 was not quite up to par with the SR-71.

SR-71 vs Mig-25.

hyena426 · « **Reply #43 on:** January 31, 2004, 01:27:10 AM »

Quote

Can a mig-25 catch an SR-71, I mean actually intercept one

nope russia tried many times,,the blackbird could fly 90,000 i bet<~~they wont tell ya the record,,most still classifide,,but on tv i seen the alt on the pilots controlls going over 80,000 feet and still climing,,so im sure it can go higher than what they showed us on tv,,,,,and i seen a deal about the blackbird with a russian pilot talking about tring to catch one with full afterburner on in mig 25,,and got visual on the blackbird,,and the blackbird just turned its nose up and took off,,,said there was no way they could catch it,,, even the missles fired at the blackbird would be out run,,that was one mean high alt plane

hyena426 · « **Reply #44 on:** January 31, 2004, 01:45:52 AM »

On November 20, 1965 an A-12 Blackbird exceeded Mach 3.2 and a sustained altitude of 90,000 feet. A stripped down, highly modified Soviet Mig-25 did break some of the Blackbirds records, however the SR-71 regained those records in July, 1976

West Coast to East Coast of USA (National Record-Speed Over a Recognized Course): Coast to Coast Distance: 2,404.05 statute miles...Time: 1 hr 07 min 53.69 secs...Average Speed: 2,124.51 mph
Los Angeles To Washington D.C. (World Record): Distance: 2,299.67 statute miles...Time: 1 hr 04 min 19.89 secs...Average Speed: 2,144.83 mph

St Louis To Cincinnati (World Record): Distance: 311.44 statute miles...Time: 8 mins 31.97 secs...Average Speed: 2,189.94 mph

Kansas City To Washington D.C. (World Record): Distance: 942.08 statute miles...Time: 25 mins 58.53 secs...Average Speed: 2176.08 mph

Mig Pilots were forbidden to exceed Mach 2.5. There was a total of three engine instruments and the airspeed indicator was redlined at 2.8 Mach.
Above Mach 2.8 the engines would overheat and burn up. The Americans had clocked a Mig-25 over Israel at Mach 3.2 in 1973. Upon landing in Egypt, the engines were totally destroyed. We did not understand that the engine destruction was inevitable.
The combat radius is 186 miles.
Without using afterburner; staying at optimum altitude and not maneuvering, the Mig can fly in a straight line for 744 miles.
The plane was so heavy, at 64,200 pounds, that Soviet designers had to eliminate a pilot ejection system.

1. A Mig-25 or Mig-31 has never fired a missile at an SR-71.
2. SR-71 Pilots state that the Mig-25/31 never posed a serious threat to their aircraft.

3. The Mig-25 can only sustain Mach 2.8 for a short duration due to engine overheat.

4. The Mig-25 can only sustain an altitude of 78,740 feet for two minutes maximum.

5. In 1973, Kelly Johnson, designer of the SR-71 Blackbird, stated that the Mig-25 Foxbat has the inherent capability to outperform the SR only in maneuverability. However, he stated, it would be the missile and not the aircraft that would require the maneuverability to intercept a Blackbird.

6. The SR-71 routinely cruised at Mach 3.2 in continuous afterburner at 80-85,000 feet. The speed and altitude of an SR-71 coupled with superior Defensive electronics has prevented any intended intercept of the Blackbird either by land based missiles or airborne Interceptor threats.

7. Almost all SR-71 Blackbird Reconnaissance Aircraft are now in Museums throughout the United States, having flown for 32 years with the distinction of being the "The highest flying and fastest air breathing aircraft in the world".