It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What Interceptor or Fighter Can Stop the SR-71?

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by BigTrain
I was going to post this yesterday, but after writing about two paragraphs and having theory of plates and shells homework dealing with the galerkin method due the next day, i chose to erase.

Without going into too much depth, heres how you could destroy an SR-71 Blackbird.

If the chosen method were missiles, you would most definately need something like an ICBM to get the job done, let me explain. First of all, the method of using a jet with a missile strapped underneath just isnt logical becuase, remember, once the fighter is detected trying to make an intercept launch, by the time that fighter is even 30,000 feet high, the SR-71 is long gone, repeat, LONG GONE. The climb to altitude of even the fastest jet, which the f-22 will break that record by the way, still does not enable the jet to get close enough to lock on and traget the sr-71 even be within range of its missiles range. And for an interceptor to be able to launch a missile, which in itself would be pretty massive and heavy to be able to reach high mach numbers and covers hundreds of miles, the plane just doesnt have the power to climb fast enough with such weight to get within range.

Back to the ICBM. This is required because the way to do this would be to forget a head on colllison due to the extreme difficulty associated in doing so. The way to do this would be for the ICBM to launch and actually "catch" the 71 from behind. This requires tons of propellant and lots of burn time with extremely fast top end. I find this is the best way to take out a 71. After thinking about the 71's operating altitude and speed, it would be assummed that this ICBM interceptor would need a burn time at least 5 minutes and a top speed of say mach 6. Mathematicals details can be forgotten, this is just assumptions based on logical speeds of both. I hope you can see where Im going here.

If anyone cares to elaborate on this idea, feel free to do so, I would also love to hear more from intelgurl, you are one smart woman.

Train


Hmmm,

Interesting theory, for one thing, I frankly don't believe that a ICBM could frankly get close to a SR-71, its not due to its speed, which the ICBM could easily reach, its the fact that the SR-71 would only have to turn say 15 degrees in either direction to avoid it or the blast. ICBMs aren't designed to be an anti aircraft missile.

I have 3 ways to down a SR-71

- S 400 Battery
- S 400 on a mig or SU
- Gun for the tankers

Its simple, Sun Tzu even has given us the answer, if the enemy is too strong to attack head long you take away their camp followers ::grins:: You gun for the tankers if you haven't got the missiles to successfully attack the SR-71
OR ambush the SR-71 when it has to slow down.

Question, Does the SR-71 have an air intercept radar?

- Phil

[edit on 14-10-2005 by gooseuk]




posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 03:21 AM
link   
It has a threat warning receiver like most USAF birds that fly where someone might shoot at them do. That's what they've publicly admitted to it having that I've seen.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 07:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by gooseuk
I have 3 ways to down a SR-71

- S 400 Battery
- S 400 on a mig or SU
- Gun for the tankers

I may be too specific here, but just for accuracy I have to say this:
The S-400 is not a missile, it is a missile system complete with radar, fire control, etc. The missiles generally associated with the S-400 system are the SA-12b and the SA-20.
Either would be a rather significant threat to an SR-71.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 07:40 AM
link   
Not to be redundant here, but other than ground based SAMs systems [which was not part of the overall equation here], what or which interceptor or fighter would be able to stop or bring down an SR-71 today? Lets consider what upgrades would be implemented within and upon the SR-71, if it was still in active service and use.






seekerof

[edit on 14-10-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 09:15 AM
link   
Seekerof, None. Maybe an XB-70 that had loiter capabilityand a real badass long range missile.

Train



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by BigTrain
Seekerof, None. Maybe an XB-70 that had loiter capabilityand a real badass long range missile.

Train

Too bad the XB-70 was cancelled in the 1960's and was a bomber.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Well, no manned aicraft that is known to exist could catch it, but we aren't talking about a dogfight. I think any number of A2A IR homing missiles being fired from a high flying fighter could be a threat.

Countermeasures for the SR that could thwart an IR seeking missile could be something like the Advanced Threat Infrared Countermeasure (ATIRCM) system which utilizes a laser to blind the infrared seeker located on the nose of the missile.

Radar countermeasures for the SR could include a system similar to the Advanced Threat Radar Jammer (ATRJ) - which employs some rather unique countermeasure methods.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 10:45 AM
link   
The best way to intercept a blackbird would be along the lines of a 'pattern' group intercept. Procedure something as follows:

1. Early warning (probably coastal or something similar) detects blackbird and basic flight plan

2. 10-15 MiG-31s (or F-14s etc) are scrambled well in advance of the flight trajectory and space themselves, say 10-20 miles apart in a line tangential to the SR-71's flightpath.

3. They rely on GCI for intercept data, keeping radars on passive until the blackbird is too close to the MiGs to turn away - then the nearest 2/3 MiGs/F-14s can let loose with everything they have in a head to head - the missiles don't have to be super fast as they are going down the throat of the blackbird.


Obviously, for such a scheme to work, you need really good warning, and the blackbird not to 'dog-leg' its flightpath, but if these two pieces fell into place, an intercept should be feasible. How long would it take a MiG-31 or F-14 to get up to sufficient altitude to launch at a SR-71?



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 10:51 AM
link   
I believe it would take something other than an F-14 or MiG - 31 to bring something like that down. I'm thinking something on the order of a Sukhoi SU - 47.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316
The best way to intercept a blackbird would be along the lines of a 'pattern' group intercept. Procedure something as follows:

1. Early warning (probably coastal or something similar) detects blackbird and basic flight plan

2. 10-15 MiG-31s (or F-14s etc) are scrambled well in advance of the flight trajectory and space themselves, say 10-20 miles apart in a line tangential to the SR-71's flightpath.

3. They rely on GCI for intercept data, keeping radars on passive until the blackbird is too close to the MiGs to turn away - then the nearest 2/3 MiGs/F-14s can let loose with everything they have in a head to head - the missiles don't have to be super fast as they are going down the throat of the blackbird.


Obviously, for such a scheme to work, you need really good warning, and the blackbird not to 'dog-leg' its flightpath, but if these two pieces fell into place, an intercept should be feasible. How long would it take a MiG-31 or F-14 to get up to sufficient altitude to launch at a SR-71?


They tried that. They couldn't get as high as the Blackbird, so they'd fly as high as they could, and when the ground control told them they would zoom climb as high as they could, and try to fire missiles at the -71. Didn't work.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
They tried that. They couldn't get as high as the Blackbird, so they'd fly as high as they could, and when the ground control told them they would zoom climb as high as they could, and try to fire missiles at the -71. Didn't work.


What about F-14s? I know the service ceiling is only 56,000ft or so, but with the long reach of the AIM-54s would they stand a chance?



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Fighter interceptors- none can fly that high.
Missile ordnance on aircraft - none can fly that fast and/or far enough.
ASAT ground or air launched missiles - doubtful. Targeting would be near impossible, it's not a satellite.
Anti-Ballistic Missile - doubtful. Targeting system optimized for in-coming ballistic, not controlled and flying away at high speed.
Lasers - doubtful. Targeting difficult. Defensive counter-measures available.

Mig-25/31 was developed to intercept the NAA Valkrie XB-70 that didn't get into production. It has extremely short range, especially when climbing to high altitude to attack. And the SR-71 is faster than an XB-70.

The problem with intercepting many modern aircraft, is that when you get there, it's not there. Active counter-measures prevent it.

Edited to add SAMs - I'll back up IntelGurl, this is what SAM's are made for, and they are a threat. At least the hyper-sonic variety. Passive and active counter-measures make it difficult, if not impossible, to intercept the world's most elusive high and fast flying aircraft.

[edit on 14-10-2005 by ZPE StarPilot]



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 11:17 AM
link   
"They tried that. They couldn't get as high as the Blackbird, so they'd fly as high as they could, and when the ground control told them they would zoom climb as high as they could, and try to fire missiles at the -71. Didn't work. "

Except when it did in the Baltic. We don't know what they were armed with but they certainly seemed confident.

(Remember also that it's a modified MiG-25 that holds the altitude records, not the Blackbird!)



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 11:22 AM
link   
If there was a requirement to shoot down something fast and high from another aircraft, then the sensible thing would be to built a new missile for an existing plane.

The (prototype) ASAT fired from a F-15 could reach satellites in orbit: no degree speed or altitude is going to protect you.

And if you're invisible, or have good enough countermeasures to block everything, why bother with the high speed and altitude anyway?

Except that it looks cool...



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wembley

And if you're invisible, or have good enough countermeasures to block everything, why bother with the high speed and altitude anyway?

Except that it looks cool...


Good point. Those modern counter-measures were not available back in the early days of the SR-71. It originally relied upon speed and altitude. Which worked well at that time. And a degree of stealth too, altho the infra-red signature from it was huge.

An example of the changes in counter-measures, is low altitude penetrating bombers. Stealthy, hugging the nap of the earth, spoofing radar returns, towing decoys, and generally creating so much confusion, you miss your chance to intercept.

Oddly enough, the next generation of stealth, has gone back up into the skies at altitude again. More for the ability to cruise and have range than anything else. I guess they worry about fuel mileage too.



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 11:45 AM
link   
Wembley, your putting too much confidence in the Mig-25. Have you ever read Mig Pilot by Belenko. He said the Mig had no chance in hell to catch the blackbird. And the climb to altidue recod by the Mig is basically a Mig stripped down to nothing, with the necessary fuel to put afterburners on the whole time so it can scream up at like a 45-60 degree angle and it basically runs out of fuel and falls back to earth.

This is illiogical for intercept just someone already pointed out, the speed of the MIG in Climb is not that great at all, whereas the sr-71 is CRUISING, at mach 3+ and nearly 100,000 feet, once the intercept is picked up, turn the bird, bye bye. havent we established this already?

The most important aspect in the SR-71 was the flight plan, IMHO. The flight planners knew not to fly the bird near major military bases or areas where intercepts were likely to be tried. They knew exactly where to fly the plane and in case of a SAM firing, knew which direction to turn the plane to escape. Your not going to fly the bird right over the MIG-25's base and SAM facilites just to prove a point.

Even though the bird was essentially untouchable, they were not going to jeopardize it at all. According to History Channel, over 3000 missiles were fired at the Blackbird, none caused any damage, or came close to a victory.

Train



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 12:37 PM
link   
i would put money on a Lightning (an old and out of service RAF fighter) intercepting a blackbird - it holds the record to 50,000 feet - 59.6 seconds from brake release!



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 09:24 PM
link   
You're joking about the lightening right? All I have to say is, please!

Train



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimmefootball400
I believe it would take something other than an F-14 or MiG - 31 to bring something like that down. I'm thinking something on the order of a Sukhoi SU - 47.

The Su-47, well many points as to why that's not possible.

1)The Su-47's Forward Swept Wing design limits it from reaching the speeds necessary to even come close to a blackbird, the FSW design gives it great manuerverability and a very low stall speed, not a very high speed and altitude capability.

2)Lack of engine power and rate of climb to even get up to that height, there is always that little trouble with it not having that possible altitude.

3)Would the Su-47 even have the missiles required?

4)It is put into production way after the SR-71 was retired.

Yea, and as for some people that think an SR-71 can simply zoom away in any direction, remember this, that at full speed, an SR-71 would require the distance equal to 3 mid-western states of the US to complete a 90 degree turn. Now that's a big turn.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Oct, 14 2005 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Furthermore, there are only two SU-47 built as technology demonstrators, and they have been sitting in a Russian aircraft hanger catching nothing but dust and rust.





seekerof



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join