By: firebar
- 14th August 2008 at 14:48Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You obviously know nothing about it. They both had problems as anybody who's made a passing glance at the history of either aircraft knows.
Sferin, Sferin, these are ABC in theory of jet engines. You should know this if you want to discuss about this matter.
Only mixed compression engines are susceptible to unstarts.
By: sferrin
- 14th August 2008 at 14:58Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sferin, Sferin, these are ABC in theory of jet engines. You should know this if you want to discuss about this matter.
Only mixed compression engines are susceptible to unstarts.
You'll have to tell that to the people who built the F-4 and XF8U-3. Apparently they imagined it all. :rolleyes:
By: firebar
- 14th August 2008 at 15:01Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If the MiG-25 was a "multi-mode" aircraft, you'd be able ot use the same jet for both intercept and reconnaissance. You can't. Just like the Blackbird, different variants existed for different missions.
I say, the Mig-25, as aircraft, is multi mode platform.
The Mig-25RB and Mig-25P are versions of MiG-25 !!!
If you think of one particular plane, note that RB version can be used for:
-Low and medium altitude tactical reccon.
-High altitude strategic reccon.
-Bombing from low, medium or very high altitudes.
-Stand-off attacks with antiradiation missiles.
A multi role by any standard.
The SR-71 was capable of only one of these roles.
By: wrightwing
- 14th August 2008 at 15:26Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I say, the Mig-25, as aircraft, is multi mode platform.
The Mig-25RB and Mig-25P are versions of MiG-25 !!!
If you think of one particular plane, note that RB version can be used for:
-Low and medium altitude tactical reccon.
-High altitude strategic reccon.
-Bombing from low, medium or very high altitudes.
-Stand-off attacks with antiradiation missiles.
A multi role by any standard.
The SR-71 was capable of only one of these roles.
By: SOC
- 14th August 2008 at 15:30Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I say, the Mig-25, as aircraft, is multi mode platform.
The Mig-25RB and Mig-25P are versions of MiG-25 !!!
And the SR-71, YF-12, and A-12 are the SAC, ADC, and CIA versions of the Lockheed OXCART design. Either they're both multi-role or they both aren't.
If you think of one particular plane, note that RB version can be used for:
-Low and medium altitude tactical reccon.
-High altitude strategic reccon.
-Bombing from low, medium or very high altitudes.
-Stand-off attacks with antiradiation missiles.
It's the MiG-25BM that carries the Kh-58 anti-radar missiles, NOT the RB. Bombing capability was an offshoot of the desire to carry large pyrotechnic charges for illumination at night. The first MiG-25Rs were pure recon jets.
A multi role by any standard.
The SR-71 was capable of only one of these roles.
If you count multiple types of reconnaissance as different roles, as you did above, then the SR-71 was multirole. It could perform significant SIGINT, ELINT, and IMINT collection, battle damage asessment, strategic reconnaissance, post-strike reconnaissance...
By: firebar
- 15th August 2008 at 09:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Nonsense. :eek:
Not at all.
In ordinary jet engines, such as J-79, F100, J-57, etc, (in any 2M engine), there are no shock wave which enter intake duct. The normal shock wave form and stay at intake lip. So there is no normal shock wave which can pop out the inlet, (unstart).
On the other hand, the mixed compression engines (J-58n and J-93) use normal shock wave which is formed and which stay in intake duct.
But the problem is that, in case of any slight airstream disturbance in intake, this normal shock wave pops out of the inlet, and great loss of thrust occurs.
A big disadvantage in combat.
The solution used on Mig-25 is much clever, without this vice.
By: firebar
- 15th August 2008 at 10:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How many Foxbats have been shot down vs. SR-71s?
Firstly, the Mig-25 was used in combat and SR-71 was not.
Secondly, all Mig-25s lost in combat are downed during descent or climb. At its combat altitudes, above 20 km, and at its cruise speed, it is untouchable.
There was at least 10 Phoenix missiles launched on Mig-25 in Iraq, and all in vane. The Migs were too fast.
The Israelis downed a few, but all at lower levels, and with carefuly prepared traps.
Imagine how many Me-262s are downed by Spits, T-bolts and Mustangs.
When you have great numerical advandage, you will down much better fighter.
And third, one A-12 has been damaged over Vietnam on 30.oct.1967 by SAM-2 missile. It was lucky escape. The peaces of missile warhead were found imbeded in lower wing area.
The SR-71 routes are carefuly prepared before each flight, to avoid any SAM missile sites.
By: firebar
- 15th August 2008 at 10:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And the SR-71, YF-12, and A-12 are the SAC, ADC, and CIA versions of the Lockheed OXCART design. Either they're both multi-role or they both aren't.
Had the YF-12 entered service, the Blackbird would have been a multi role a/c.
But great technical problems prevented the YF-12 from entering service status. I said earlier, its alert time, as interceptor, was awfull. As well as its inability for any normal maneuvering (loops, zooms, rools, split-S, sudden dives, etc).
People often don't realise one thing about Blackbird: all phases of its route must be carefuly prepared before flight. The improvisation is not allowed. It is very sensitive to any disturbance of preplaned route.
That is the reason why it was only usefull as strategic high altitude reconnaissance.
If you count multiple types of reconnaissance as different roles, as you did above, then the SR-71 was multirole. It could perform significant SIGINT, ELINT, and IMINT collection, battle damage asessment, strategic reconnaissance, post-strike reconnaissance...
No,no. It was not flexible enough for tactical, low and medium altitude reconnaissance.
Only high altitude reconnaissance was the option for Blackbird. It had no enough airframe strength for lower altitude flights.
It was in fact high altitude gas tank. Very fragile.
By: MadRat
- 15th August 2008 at 12:48Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
firebar, where did you get the 10 pheonix launches in Iraq? F-14's only got two potential intercept opportunities that I can recall. And the Iran-Iraq conflict doesn't seem to account for any launches of Pheonix against MiG-25's. What is the source of your claim?
By: SOC
- 15th August 2008 at 12:49Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Firstly, the Mig-25 was used in combat and SR-71 was not.
Lies. The SR-71A was used over Libya during ELDORADO CANYON, and was used extensively over Korea and Vietnam during the Vietnam War.
There was at least 10 Phoenix missiles launched on Mig-25 in Iraq, and all in vane. The Migs were too fast.
Lies. Read Iran Iraq: War In The Air or Iranian F-14s In Combat.
And third, one A-12 has been damaged over Vietnam on 30.oct.1967 by SAM-2 missile. It was lucky escape. The peaces of missile warhead were found imbeded in lower wing area.
Lies. The solitary fragment found was a piece of the missile body not a warhead fragment.
The SR-71 routes are carefuly prepared before each flight, to avoid any SAM missile sites.
Lies. Baltic flights for example commonly entered within SA-5 range and MiG-25/31 range. Being outside USSR airspace, they weren't going to be shot at. A-12 flights overflew North Korea with impunity, disregarding the SA-2s on the ground there.
I said earlier, its alert time, as interceptor, was awfull.
An alert time you have no basis in fact for.
As well as its inability for any normal maneuvering (loops, zooms, rools, split-S, sudden dives, etc).
Irrelevant. It was a bomber interceptor, not a fighter aircraft. Find me the long-range bomber that was doing all of those maneuvers.
Only high altitude reconnaissance was the option for Blackbird.
Irrelevant. The sensor system did not need to drop to a lower altitude to function effectively.
By: Sens
- 15th August 2008 at 13:43Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Not at all.
In ordinary jet engines, such as J-79, F100, J-57, etc, (in any 2M engine), there are no shock wave which enter intake duct. The normal shock wave form and stay at intake lip. So there is no normal shock wave which can pop out the inlet, (unstart).
On the other hand, the mixed compression engines (J-58n and J-93) use normal shock wave which is formed and which stay in intake duct.
But the problem is that, in case of any slight airstream disturbance in intake, this normal shock wave pops out of the inlet, and great loss of thrust occurs.
A big disadvantage in combat.
The solution used on Mig-25 is much clever, without this vice.
For the benefit of the others. That has nothing to do with the engine, but with the inlet-system choosen. Fixed inlets, cone regulated inlets or a ramp-systems.
By: firebar
- 21st August 2008 at 10:46Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
One Israeli F-15 destroyed by Syrian Mig-25:
"Syria obtained 30 MiG-25PD interceptors, along with five MiG-25PU trainers and eight MiG-25RB reconnaissance machines. Two Syrian MiG-25s mixed it up with two Israeli F-15s on 13 February 1981, both sides losing an aircraft. "
By: firebar
- 21st August 2008 at 10:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
firebar, where did you get the 10 pheonix launches in Iraq? F-14's only got two potential intercept opportunities that I can recall. And the Iran-Iraq conflict doesn't seem to account for any launches of Pheonix against MiG-25's. What is the source of your claim?
Sure. Iranians had no serviceable Phoenixes.
In the first Gulf war there was Phoenix shooting at Mig-25, but all in vane.
By: firebar
- 21st August 2008 at 11:09Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The MIG-25 flew extensively at 25 km altitudes, over western countries also, during cold war.
"The planes are known to have flown over China, Pakistan and other countries to take stock of their military preparations but returned undetected after conducting sorties at an altitude of 25 km. However, one flight over Pakistan in 1997 led to tensions with Islamabad claiming that the MiG-25 deliberately gave out its signature to underline the absence of a plane of similar capability with it.
Called "Foxbat" in NATO parlance, they flew extensively over Western Bloc countries during the Cold War."
By: firebar
- 21st August 2008 at 11:28Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Lies. The SR-71A was used over Libya during ELDORADO CANYON, and was used extensively over Korea and Vietnam during the Vietnam War.
It is used in wars, but not in combat. It is not combat a/c, as the Mig-25 is.
The mission planning for SR-71 avoids any combat zones.
Lies. The solitary fragment found was a piece of the missile body not a warhead fragment.
It was a close call. A lucky escape for Blackbird. So, parts of missile body struct the Blackbird. Wow. Even higher accuracy is needed to achieve this.
As it is known now, the A-12 never dared to overfly Vietnam again, and it is retired soon.
And some sources say that it had higher performance than SR-71.
Just imagine what could SAM-5 do to SR-71. It would be slaughter.
But mission planning did its job for SR-71 well, to avoid such threats.
Irrelevant. The sensor system did not need to drop to a lower altitude to function effectively.[/QUOTE]
Posts: 9,683
By: sferrin - 14th August 2008 at 14:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Don't forget the bag of free lollypops it comes with for all the little kiddies. :rolleyes:
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 14th August 2008 at 14:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sferin, Sferin, these are ABC in theory of jet engines. You should know this if you want to discuss about this matter.
Only mixed compression engines are susceptible to unstarts.
Posts: 9,683
By: sferrin - 14th August 2008 at 14:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You'll have to tell that to the people who built the F-4 and XF8U-3. Apparently they imagined it all. :rolleyes:
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 14th August 2008 at 15:01 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I say, the Mig-25, as aircraft, is multi mode platform.
The Mig-25RB and Mig-25P are versions of MiG-25 !!!
If you think of one particular plane, note that RB version can be used for:
-Low and medium altitude tactical reccon.
-High altitude strategic reccon.
-Bombing from low, medium or very high altitudes.
-Stand-off attacks with antiradiation missiles.
A multi role by any standard.
The SR-71 was capable of only one of these roles.
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 14th August 2008 at 15:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The F-4 and F-8 both have external compression propulsion systems.
Such propulsion systems do not suffer from unstarts.
Posts: 11,742
By: Sens - 14th August 2008 at 15:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Nonsense. :eek:
Posts: 4,042
By: wrightwing - 14th August 2008 at 15:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How many Foxbats have been shot down vs. SR-71s?
Posts: 12,009
By: SOC - 14th August 2008 at 15:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And the SR-71, YF-12, and A-12 are the SAC, ADC, and CIA versions of the Lockheed OXCART design. Either they're both multi-role or they both aren't.
It's the MiG-25BM that carries the Kh-58 anti-radar missiles, NOT the RB. Bombing capability was an offshoot of the desire to carry large pyrotechnic charges for illumination at night. The first MiG-25Rs were pure recon jets.
If you count multiple types of reconnaissance as different roles, as you did above, then the SR-71 was multirole. It could perform significant SIGINT, ELINT, and IMINT collection, battle damage asessment, strategic reconnaissance, post-strike reconnaissance...
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 15th August 2008 at 09:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Not at all.
In ordinary jet engines, such as J-79, F100, J-57, etc, (in any 2M engine), there are no shock wave which enter intake duct. The normal shock wave form and stay at intake lip. So there is no normal shock wave which can pop out the inlet, (unstart).
On the other hand, the mixed compression engines (J-58n and J-93) use normal shock wave which is formed and which stay in intake duct.
But the problem is that, in case of any slight airstream disturbance in intake, this normal shock wave pops out of the inlet, and great loss of thrust occurs.
A big disadvantage in combat.
The solution used on Mig-25 is much clever, without this vice.
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 15th August 2008 at 10:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Firstly, the Mig-25 was used in combat and SR-71 was not.
Secondly, all Mig-25s lost in combat are downed during descent or climb. At its combat altitudes, above 20 km, and at its cruise speed, it is untouchable.
There was at least 10 Phoenix missiles launched on Mig-25 in Iraq, and all in vane. The Migs were too fast.
The Israelis downed a few, but all at lower levels, and with carefuly prepared traps.
Imagine how many Me-262s are downed by Spits, T-bolts and Mustangs.
When you have great numerical advandage, you will down much better fighter.
And third, one A-12 has been damaged over Vietnam on 30.oct.1967 by SAM-2 missile. It was lucky escape. The peaces of missile warhead were found imbeded in lower wing area.
The SR-71 routes are carefuly prepared before each flight, to avoid any SAM missile sites.
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 15th August 2008 at 10:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Had the YF-12 entered service, the Blackbird would have been a multi role a/c.
But great technical problems prevented the YF-12 from entering service status. I said earlier, its alert time, as interceptor, was awfull. As well as its inability for any normal maneuvering (loops, zooms, rools, split-S, sudden dives, etc).
People often don't realise one thing about Blackbird: all phases of its route must be carefuly prepared before flight. The improvisation is not allowed. It is very sensitive to any disturbance of preplaned route.
That is the reason why it was only usefull as strategic high altitude reconnaissance.
No,no. It was not flexible enough for tactical, low and medium altitude reconnaissance.
Only high altitude reconnaissance was the option for Blackbird. It had no enough airframe strength for lower altitude flights.
It was in fact high altitude gas tank. Very fragile.
Posts: 4,951
By: MadRat - 15th August 2008 at 12:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
firebar, where did you get the 10 pheonix launches in Iraq? F-14's only got two potential intercept opportunities that I can recall. And the Iran-Iraq conflict doesn't seem to account for any launches of Pheonix against MiG-25's. What is the source of your claim?
Posts: 12,009
By: SOC - 15th August 2008 at 12:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Lies. The SR-71A was used over Libya during ELDORADO CANYON, and was used extensively over Korea and Vietnam during the Vietnam War.
Lies. Read Iran Iraq: War In The Air or Iranian F-14s In Combat.
Lies. The solitary fragment found was a piece of the missile body not a warhead fragment.
Lies. Baltic flights for example commonly entered within SA-5 range and MiG-25/31 range. Being outside USSR airspace, they weren't going to be shot at. A-12 flights overflew North Korea with impunity, disregarding the SA-2s on the ground there.
An alert time you have no basis in fact for.
Irrelevant. It was a bomber interceptor, not a fighter aircraft. Find me the long-range bomber that was doing all of those maneuvers.
Irrelevant. The sensor system did not need to drop to a lower altitude to function effectively.
Posts: 11,742
By: Sens - 15th August 2008 at 13:43 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
For the benefit of the others. That has nothing to do with the engine, but with the inlet-system choosen. Fixed inlets, cone regulated inlets or a ramp-systems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_engine#Supersonic_inlets
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 21st August 2008 at 10:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
One Israeli F-15 destroyed by Syrian Mig-25:
"Syria obtained 30 MiG-25PD interceptors, along with five MiG-25PU trainers and eight MiG-25RB reconnaissance machines. Two Syrian MiG-25s mixed it up with two Israeli F-15s on 13 February 1981, both sides losing an aircraft. "
www.vectorsite.net/avmig25
"Foxbat in foreign service"
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 21st August 2008 at 10:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
http://www.vectorsite.net/avmig25_1.html
The F-15 dropped by Mig-25.
"Foxbat in foreign service"
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 21st August 2008 at 10:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sure. Iranians had no serviceable Phoenixes.
In the first Gulf war there was Phoenix shooting at Mig-25, but all in vane.
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=7193&page=5
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 21st August 2008 at 11:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Indian Air Force statement:
"The IAF's decision to decommission the plane was taken four years ago as the Air Force faced immense difficulty in obtaining spares.
It was a terrific plane... neither an aircraft nor a missile could chase," Air Vice Marshal Sumit Mukurjhee said. The IAF had, in early 1981."
http://www.hindu.com/2006/05/02/stories/2006050201992000.htm
There is no missile which could chase Mig-25. It is too fast and maneuverable.
According to IAF.
That is why all Phoenixes missed in Gulf war.
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 21st August 2008 at 11:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The MIG-25 flew extensively at 25 km altitudes, over western countries also, during cold war.
"The planes are known to have flown over China, Pakistan and other countries to take stock of their military preparations but returned undetected after conducting sorties at an altitude of 25 km. However, one flight over Pakistan in 1997 led to tensions with Islamabad claiming that the MiG-25 deliberately gave out its signature to underline the absence of a plane of similar capability with it.
Called "Foxbat" in NATO parlance, they flew extensively over Western Bloc countries during the Cold War."
http://www.hindu.com/2006/04/07/stories/2006040704221500.htm
Posts: 875
By: firebar - 21st August 2008 at 11:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It is used in wars, but not in combat. It is not combat a/c, as the Mig-25 is.
The mission planning for SR-71 avoids any combat zones.
It was a close call. A lucky escape for Blackbird. So, parts of missile body struct the Blackbird. Wow. Even higher accuracy is needed to achieve this.
As it is known now, the A-12 never dared to overfly Vietnam again, and it is retired soon.
And some sources say that it had higher performance than SR-71.
Just imagine what could SAM-5 do to SR-71. It would be slaughter.
But mission planning did its job for SR-71 well, to avoid such threats.
Irrelevant. The sensor system did not need to drop to a lower altitude to function effectively.[/QUOTE]