firebarThe reason the requirement got dropped from 2.7 to 2.5 was because they felt the acrylic bubble canopy was more useful than an extra 0.2 mach. And in the end they were right. If you were going into combat would you rather do it in a Mig-25 or an F-15?
It depends of what is your intended mission.
If it is dogfight, the F-15 is obvious choice, but if it is to be interception of SR-71 then MiG-25 is invaluable.
Also if reconnaissance or bombing mission is demanded over heavily defended area, it is easy to make a choice of these two aircraft.
If attacks against heavily defended radar sites it planned, would you chose MiG-25 with Kh-58 or F-15A or C ?
firebarA little bit of twisting reality?!
That very radar-track was made during a Port-Said>Suez-run alongside the Suez and not over Israel. Over Israel it was ~ Mach 2,5.
That Mach 3,2 incident showed, that the MiG-25R had passed Mach 3 for a brief moment without damage, when inspected afterwards.
Nothing more and nothing less.From that book ‘MiG’ p406:
“..,but a number of pilots have (more or less intentionally) exceeded Mach 3 without causing damage to the aircraft or sending it to the overhaul shop to check for structural yielding.”
Right, but these flights showed to the world clearly what are the max operational capabilities of the aircraft.
See also: MIG-25, Gordon, Putmakow.
firebarYes, of course you’re right Firebar. Mach 2.7 was just too tough for them. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: It would have been easy for them to go for sh!tty visability in the F-15 like they did with the Foxbat but they wanted to keep the bubble canopy. (No doubt he will now claim that visibility in the Foxbat is better than in the Eagle :rolleyes: )
The visibility from the cockpit for Mach 2 and Mach 3 aircraft can not be compared, but you must admit that among Mach 3 aircraft, the MiG-25 have excellent visibility, ectually the best.
Look at visibility of YF-12, F-108, XB-70, X-2.
The cockpit visibility of the F-16 is even better than that of F-15, but it is also a much slower fighter.
firebarEver heard about the T-4 from the 60s and there fate? But I fear, you do not grasp the meaning of that.
The T-4 was intended to be a high speed bomber, not fighter.
firebarI’m still unsure where you are getting the data that the MiG-25 was reliable to M3.2?
There are many sources. One is famous anti russian book “Mig Pilot” by John Barron. Many other sources also say that MiG-25 was tracked over Israel at 3,2 Mach. The chief Mikoyan designer Belyakov, also in a book “MIG” says that it can surpass Mach 3 without any damage to the aircraft.
He says that 3000 km/h (2,83 M ) was imposed to aircraft purely theoreticaly, with missiles.
Note that, in Russian sources, max speed for all Russian fighters is given with missiles.
That is in pure contrast with western standards for max speed data for west fighters.
If the Vne of the MiG 25 was 2.85 as quoted in the literature….this is the relaible maximum speed… that it can be exceeded without damaging the airframe is irrelevant… there was a reason for the 2.85 limit…and that may range from the Soviet testing regime establishing that 2.85 is the max that the ‘typical’ pilot can deal with or the long life issue I don’t know…all that is known is that whilst MiG 25s have been tracked at M3+…did those airframes then ‘use up’ their fatigue life far faster? Were they piloted by the best pilots? Even amongst the MiG 25 pilots…
Note that max speed limit with missiles (or bombs in case of RB ), is 3000 km/h, a rounded figure.
Without 2 tonnes of underwing load, every aircraft is much faster, and much more stable.
My feeling is that the margins were set ‘low’ to ensure the enitre fleet sould meet that but knowing that more able pilots could and would exceed that speed ‘when necessary’…
As Belyakov say: ” 3000 km/h is theoretical, rounded figure, but aircaft can exceed this without damage to the aircraft.”
As to the records….
For the 1000km with 2000kg there is an official answer, and that the Sr cannot officially carry 2000kg…so end of conversation….
However in reality I think it would make no differnce at all.. Remember that 80,000lbs fuel load. If we imagine that by the time the SR reaches its full cruise speed there are 60,000lbs remaining, the additional payload would not significantly affect the speed. So my guess is that the Sr would still be faster.. but just a guess.
In a book “Blackbird family” -Goodall, Miller, 2002, page 84, we can find:
“SR-71 payload capability is 2090 kg (4610 lb)”, with a graphic explanation.
All payload is in forward section, forward of C.G, which is not very good position regarding stability.
By contrast, the YF-12 had payload in midsection, around C.G., and that aircraft took 1t ,as well as 2t payload, close circuit records.
May be it was the reason why SR-71 never attempted closed circuit speed record with 2 t payload.
The SR-71 can haul 80.000 lb of fuel, but in record flights it carried only enough fuel to finish the trip, not more.
I would argue that the real challenge that the SR addresses far better than the MiG 25 is the percentage of its flight time spent above M3+.
That is, of course, true.
The SR-71 has normal cruise speed of 3,1 M with maximum dash 3,3 Mach. The MiG-25 is 2,35 Mach cruiser (with missiles) with max cruise of 2,85 M (also with missiles) and with 3,2 Mach dash, clean.
As to which I would prefer…I’d prefer the best tools to do each job, that means the best recon platform and the best interceptor fighter platform avaliable…so the SR/ F-15 mix was the one the US selected…they realised that the planned F-108 and YF-12 were just not effective or needed.
The SR-71 can be used only as strategic, very inflexible, long range reccon mission aircraft.
The MIG-25, on the other hand, can be used as strategic reccon, tactical reccon aircraft ( where short notice alert is needed), interceptor against low and high flying targets, all altitudes bomber, anti radar platform with Kh-58 anti radar missiles.
And all of that in great numbers.
The F-15 was intended to have 2,7 Mach dash speed , but thermal problems for a multi role aircraft proved to be too much for McDonnell designers. Requirement was lowered to 2,5 Mach dash clean, and later to 2,3 Mach.
firebarObviously the US preferred the 50 Blackbirds else they’d have bought the F-108. The US didn’t NEED an interceptor though so they didn’t.
Could it be that they had been unable to design Mach 3 multi role aircraft ?
You hardly need a Mach 3 interceptor to shoot down a prop-driven Bear
Then, why it was designed and tested at all ?
No matter of intruder speed, you need a very fast interceptor if intruder is at great distance from you, and you are not in close distance to defending site.
Remember that F-15 was originaly intended to have 2,7 Mach speed, but it was too much for designers.
firebarFirebar,
I think they did not feel it was worth doing. Hence they did not attempt it.
You must admit that it is a strange thing, to say the least.
And it is not solitary case regarding russian record breaking aircraft.
See Beriev Be-12.
It also set all possible speed records in closed circuits except in streight course, for turboprop flying boats. It is by far the fastest in the class, but it did not atempt streight line speed record. Only in closed circuits. WHY ?
As for the E-76/ Mig 21 and the MiG-25/ E-266 issue.
I agree with you, but note that YF-12 was also experimental fighter, just like E-266M.
The SR which took the records was a production (yes they didn’t build many, but its still a production item) aircraft…not a developmental version.
The point is that it is far easier to design plain Mach 3 aircraft, without fire control system, without external weapons, without strength for high speed low level flight and with engines which are optimised only for high altitude unmaneuvering flight, than multi mission, multi altitude, payload carying Mach 3 fighter.
I would also wonder if you class a 400 km/h difference as slight…
(1000km closed course/ no payload/1000kg for the SR and 1000km/2000kg for the 25.)
True, it was 400 km/h difference in 1000 km closed circuit with 1000 kg payload, but we may only gues what the difference would be with 2000 kg payload.
And what do you think, which of them would be faster over 500 km circuit ?
The MiG-25 was about 350 km/h faster over 500 km circuit than YF-12.
When I said that SR-71 has been a shade faster, I meant in max reliably recorded speed.
It is 3,3 Mach for SR-71 in record flight and 3,2 Mach for MiG-25 operationaly over enemy teritory.
Granted the MiG 25 had more roles… but the SR was designed as a single mission type aicraft, never intended to do more or less…
Of course, but from engineering point of view, it is far easier to built reccon Mach 3 aircraft than multi mode one.
Difference in design and engineering problems which must be solved for those two roles can not be compared.
As to numbers…should we discount the records set by the An 225 on the basis of numbers built? I’m pretty certain the Ye-266M was not built in more than a few say 3-5 examples…
Nobody can dicount SR-71 records. Mach 3,3 is the fastest speed officialy recorded ever by air breathing manned aircraft.
But my point is:
Would you preffer 30 single mission, only high altitude recconaissance Mach 3,2 aircraft or 1200 multi mode, all altitude aircraft with speed of 2,83 Mach with 4 missiles and 3,2 Mach clean dash ?
firebarFirebar,
I do not know why the Russians did not attempt to take the straight line speed…perhaps they just couldn’t be bothered? Or maybe they knew that they would not be able to get thro the gates..as their instruments and flight control systems are not precise enough?
I am sure that you do not believe in this explanation.
It makes no difference as to why.. I tried to give an explanation as to why on that day the record was not achieved.
The closed circuit records of TU-114 has been set on 1960, and there was plenty of time for streight line record also. And still there is time.
But obviously, there is no will.
As for the MiG-25…its not the E-266M or the E-266….if we are to believe Belyakov… but I’ll accept you know better..
Of course it is E-266.
As you know, Mig-21 had designation E-76.
Do you think that E-76 was not Mig-21 ?
The reality for you guys is that whilst the MiG 25 is the fastest operational interceptor it is/ was not the fastest operational aircraft deployed into regular squadron service by the military. It is a massive technological achievement and taught many lessons to the West in terms of focusing the design and manufacturing effort in ways the West would never have thoght of…but its greatest achievement was to scare the West into developing the F-15 and F-14 fighters…
The MiG-25 was and is the fastest combat aircraft ever deployed and the SR-71 was the fastest military aircraft.
But the point is that the MiG-25 was by far more useful aircraft, being multi mode design for many missions, and only a shade slower in streight line and faster in closed circuit flights.
Compare also a few dozen Blackbirds against more than 1200 Mig-25s !!!
Its records for speed in closed circuits, climb and absolute ceilings, with and without payload will stand for a long, long time.
In that, it is a unique aircraft.
firebarYou can claim what you want, the official data proof otherwise.
No FAI record and the MiG is still redlined at Mach 2,8.If you are right, the Indians can set at strait-line FAI record with ease and exhibit that MiG in the museum afterwards. No restrictions through lifetime considerations either.
No, because the SR-71 holds the record of 3,3 Mach and MiG-25 can not fly at more than 3,2 Mach.
But until the SR-71 record in 1976, the MiG-25 could have took the record from YF-12, officialy, because it was confirmed by many sources in other countries.
Note how much faster it was over 500 and 1000 km closed circuits than YF-12.
firebarFirebar, you would like the Mig-25 to be faster then it is.
The speed must be confirmed. That is the main point.
You can not accept everything you read in some doubtful book.
You are right.
The speed must be confirmed by FAI or operationally from some foreign sources.
firebarGuys,
In order to actually get the record there are literally anumber of hoops to get thro…one of which is the ‘gate’ or ‘gates’ thro which the aircraft has to pass…..these are limited in altitude and relative to each other.. for example the course gates mean paaing thro a gate which is only 30ft differnce to the starting gate….which means after say 100/500/1000km the aircraft altitude has to be within 300ft of its starting altitiude….now errors of this magnitude are possible.. and hence a record attempt (not logged on the FAI website) will fail.. faster or not.
For the straightline speed the gates are relative to eahc other (150ft) so its quite possible that the Tu114 missed its gate in the straight line speed record…hence the P-3 has it….no disrespect to the Tu114….
But on that partiuclar day it ‘missed’…whether or not they wanted the record or not..
Do you realy believe in that ?
The TU-95 is still in service and had plenty of time to take this record.
Its max speed in service is 905 km/h.
But nevertheless, the P-3 still holds this record, set in 1971 !!!
The same situation is with Beriev Be-12, turboprop flying boat.
It holds all speed records in closed circuits , and is faster by far than any other in its class, but it also never attempted streight line record. Why ?
Look the MiG-25 speed records from that angle.
firebarAs is probably apparent by now you’re wasting your time with Firebar. He’s going to believe what he wants to believe and he’ll be damned if he’s going to listen to anything to the contrary no matter how how much proof there is :diablo: The SR-71 could have a Mach 4 record on video tape and yet he’d still come up with some bizarre “reasoning” that “proves” the Mig-25 is still faster:
The SR-71 Manual says its max speed was 3,2 Mach, and with special permition UP TO 3,3 Mach.
I said that MiG-25 was faster than SR-71 in any closed circuits with reasonable payloads, and that it is faster than YF-12 in any flight regime, with or without payload.
What is doubtful about that ? The FAI records and operational missions over Israel prove that.
firebarBack to that tired old ploy huh? Does the Foxbat hold any FAI records at Mach 3.2? No? Well then that Israel thing you keep mentioning is a bunch of lies by your own account.
The american and indian sources also say 3,2 Mach. So, this is not an Israeli lie.
If we had only russian sources about that, you could say that it is doubtful, but there are many other sources.
firebarAs is probably apparent by now you’re wasting your time with Firebar. He’s going to believe what he wants to believe and he’ll be damned if he’s going to listen to anything to the contrary no matter how how much proof there is :diablo: The SR-71 could have a Mach 4 record on video tape and yet he’d still come up with some bizarre “reasoning” that “proves” the Mig-25 is still faster. :rolleyes:
Sferrin, you would like the SR-71 to be faster then it is.
The speed must be confirmed. That is the main point.
You can not accept everything you read in some doubtful book.
firebarBack to that tired old ploy huh? Does the Foxbat hold any FAI records at Mach 3.2? No? Well then that Israel thing you keep mentioning is a bunch of lies by your own account.
It is like TU-114 records.
That aircraft holds all speed records for turboprop engined aircraft in closed circuits.
It holds speed record of 877 km/h in 5000 km closed circuit.
But it never attempted speed record in streight line. It is strange.
So, we now have situation that the current world speed record for turboprop aircraft holds P-3 Orion with 806 km/h !!!
Think about that.
The Russians never wanted that record. Why ?
Sign In
