It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The ultimate supersonic Aircraft

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 23 2006 @ 01:41 PM
M-12: A two seat version of the A-12 that could launch the D-21 Reconnassance Drone


[edit on 23-5-2006 by ghost]

It was actually the M-21, not the M-12. When combined with the D-21 they were know as the MD-21

posted on May, 23 2006 @ 04:15 PM

Well the same could be said for the MiG-25.....etc

Yes quite so, I was just pointing it out as a little known fact, not staking any sort of claim.

The TSR 2 was a superior airframe to the MiG 25 which, as was discovered when Belenko gave us one, was actually pretty crudely made. Comparison between the MiG 31 and TSR 2 is pretty pointless as they are separated by more than two decades, unless you think that, had the TSR 2 survived BAC would have done nothing to further develop the aircraft in the subsequent 20+ years? The engines that powered the TSR 2 were also superior to teh engines of the MiG 25, during the 26 years that Concorde was in service no other engine demonstrated such sustained operation at supersonic speeds (up to 3hrs when fighter engines only manage a few minutes at most).

[edit on 23-5-2006 by waynos]

posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 10:16 PM
You know you have a real performer when you can outrun one of the fastest accelerating fighters in service. And that's what TRS.2 did. It was perhaps the best designed supersonic aircraft ever flown (minus the details of the landing gear and engines). In that form, Britian would have joined the Mach 3 club in no time, and had low level toughness to boot. Take an SR-71 low level at Mach 1? Bye-bye Blackbird. Or the MiG for that matter. In it's short life, it exceeded the expectations of who built it and challenged it. A bomber with all the grace of a fighter and the strength of a tank. Fast up high and down low. No aircarft has yet matched it.
As for the first sentence, the TSR.2's only supersonic flight was over the Irish Sea, escorted by a Lightning T.5, which is not slow by anyone's standards. And yet, when the Lightning lit both it's burner, and the TSR only one, the Lightning was left behind.

posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 10:51 PM
I would also put in a vote for the SR-71, when one considers when the aircaft was made and what the craft actually was able to do, the blackbird was a groundbreaking design that has a performance profile that is still respected by todays standards.

[edit on 2-6-2006 by LCKob]

posted on Sep, 14 2007 @ 07:39 PM
This is my top 5 list:
5. Sukhoi Tu-144
4. Concorde
3. Sukhoi T-4
2. North American XB-70
1. Lockheed SR-71 (anyone who disputes the Blackbird as #1 is crazy)

I didn't include the Mig-25/31 because it can't sustain high speeds for long. All of these aircraft were designed to maintain supersonic speeds for long periods of time and cruise at them.
Also, notice how none of these aircraft were ever exported to another country. Just shows how you must keep the best for yourself.

Honorable mentions: Mig-25/31, B-58, TSR.2, Mirage IV

posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 06:04 AM
In order:

Concorde - what other aircraft could cruise for over 3 hours at Mach 2 without afterburners with logistics not significantly higher than conventional airliners?

Mig-31 - Mach 2.35 for over a thousand miles and one of the most powerful radars ever fitted to an aircraft.

Sr-71 - Mach 3 for 3000 miles, becoming more efficiant as it went further.

posted on Sep, 15 2007 @ 11:10 AM
Concorde would be my ultimate vote too, the magnitude of the achievement of Concorde is severely underestimated by an awful lot of people, a NASA scientist was once quoted as saying that putting a man on the moon was easy compared to making Concorde work.

posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 06:28 AM
Supersonic military aircraft maximum speed

YF-12 Blackbird 3661 km/h
A-12 Blackbird 3560 km/h
SR-71 Blackbird 3530 km/h
MiG-25 "Foxbat" 3390 km/h
XB-70 Valkyrie 3309 km/h
Suhoi T-4 3200 km/h
MiG-31 "Foxhound" 3000 km/h
XF8U-3 Crusader III 2832 km/h
F-15 Eagle 2698 km/h
YF-23 Black Widow II 2655 km/h
F-111 Fighting Aardvark 2650 km/h
Suhoi T-50 2600 km/h
F-14D Tomcat 2548 km/h
Su-30MKI "Flanker-H" 2500 km/h
Mirage G8 2495 km/h
Su-27 "Flanker-B" 2480 km/h
F-106 Delta Dart 2455 km/h
CF-105 Arrow 2453 km/h
MiG MFI "Flatpack" 2450 km/h
Mirage 4000 2445 km/h
MiG-23 "Flogger" 2445 km/h
IAI Kfir 2440 km/h
BAC Lightning 2415 km/h
Su-35 "Flanker-E" 2410 km/h
F-22 Raptor 2410 km/h
MiG-29 "Fulcrum" 2400 km/h
F-4E Phantom II 2391 km/h
Eurofighter Typhoon 2390 km/h
BAC TSR.2 2390 km/h
Mirage 5 2350 km/h
Mirage III 2350 km/h
Mirage F1 2350 km/h
Mirage IV 2340 km/h
Chengdu J-10 2339 km/h
Mirage 2000 2338 km/h
Shenyang J-8 II "Finback" 2338 km/h
Tornado ADV 2338 km/h
Tornado IDS 2337 km/h
F-104 Starfighter 2335 km/h
Mirage F2 2333 km/h
B-1A Excalibur 2333 km/h
Tu-22M "Backfire" 2327 km/h
Su-24 "Fencer" 2320 km/h
JA37 Viggen 2231 km/h
Su-15 "Flagon" 2230 km/h
Su-11 "Fishpot" 2230 km/h
B-58 Hustler 2230 km/h
A-5 Vigilante 2229 km/h
Tu-160 "Blackjack" 2220 km/h
EF-111A Raven 2216 km/h
F-105 Thunderchief 2208 km/h
F-16 Fighting Falcon 2175 km/h
MiG-21 "Fishbed" 2175 km/h
Su-7 "Fitter" 2150 km/h
J35 Draken 2126 km/h
Rafale 2125 km/h
F-20 Tigershark 2124 km/h
Mitsubishi F-2 2124 km/h
JAS39 Gripen 2124 km/h
Su-30 "Flanker-C" 2120 km/h
Su-30MKK "Flanker-G" 2120 km/h
YF-107A 2084 km/h
F-35 Lightning II 2065 km/h
La-250A Anakonda 2000 km/h
HAL Tejas 1990 km/h
IAI Lavi 1965 km/h
M-50 "Bounder" 1950 km/h
F-CK-1 Ching Kuo 1920 km/h
F/A-18 Hornet 1915 km/h
Chengdu FC-1 1909 km/h
Su-34 "Fullback" 1900 km/h
MiG-27 "Flogger" 1885 km/h
F-8 Crusader 1860 km/h
Su-17 "Fitter" 1860 km/h
Yak-28P "Firebar" 1840 km/h
F-101 Voodoo 1825 km/h
Xian JH-7 "Flounder" 1808 km/h
Yak-41 "Freestyle" 1800 km/h
F-5 Tiger II 1745 km/h
Tu-28P "Fiddler" 1740 km/h
Mitsubishi F-1 1700 km/h
Mitsubishi T-2 1700 km/h
SEPECAT Jaguar 1593 km/h
Tu-22 "Blinder" 1510 km/h
MiG-19 "Farmer" 1455 km/h
F-100 Super Sabre 1390 km/h
T-38 Talon 1381 km/h
B-1B Lancer 1330 km/h
F-102 Delta Dagger 1328 km/h
Yak-38 "Forger" 1280 km/h
F-6 Skyray 1200 km/h
Super Mystere 1195 km/h
Nanchang Q-5 "Fantan" 1190 km/h
Sea Harrier 1182 km/h
F-11 Tiger 1170 km/h

posted on Jun, 4 2011 @ 07:17 AM
reply to post by kondor

And not one of 'em as impressive as Concorde.

Mach 2, for hours at a time, for 26 years, whilst carrying over 100 commercial passengers, drinking champagne and eating caviar, and all their luggage in complete safety. Military jets are feeble in comparison.

Well, hardly feeble, but you get my drift I hope. It's more that so many factors went into Concorde that designers of military jets never have to give a second thought to.
edit on 4-6-2011 by waynos because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 11:23 AM
a reply to: waynos TSR.2 was not an interesting design not even on paper .Its alleged superiority over the F-111 is also pure speculation and has never been proven since TSR2 never saw action in any war and remained as prototype until its cancellation . In the end, the F-111 became a superb bomber which outperformed TSR2's theoretical performance parameters by a long distance, it flew faster, had a longer range and bigger combat radius and most important of all, delivered 40% more payload and much more economical to fly with its state of the art Turbofan jet engines which TSR2 didn't have ( Its Bristol Siddeley engines were completely outdated ) .. Actually, the main reason why it was cancelled was a secret paper issued by Air Staff Target in 1961 which revealed that it would have a lifetime of 10 years only before its operational effectiveness will start to depreciate and its obvious that TSR2 engineers have failed to find a solution to this vital problem,leaving the British government no other chance than cancelling it 10 years is simply not enough for such an expensive and costly plane Source: Facebook .. TSR2-Britains lost bomber

The whole TSR-2 story is highly exaggerated nonsense and has little to do with reality !!

posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 01:57 PM
a reply to: waynos

Totally agree!!

posted on Mar, 26 2016 @ 07:15 AM
The british and the french destroyed the Concorde with the specific aim of obscurantism. They hoped to destroy the idea of fast passenger and goods traveling. They also employed deceptive propaganda of fake possibilities of using other means for fast travel. Those deceptive means where: The idea of hypersonic jets for passenger, or ballistic missiles for fast travel.

This trend must be immediately reverted by the competitors and adversaries of the EU.
It is high time for Russia and China to put successors of the tu-144 in production and flight!!!

P.S. You know how it works... Be careful what you wish for, you might just get it!!!
edit on 26-3-2016 by Flanker86 because: Renzian punctualization!!!

posted on Mar, 27 2016 @ 12:55 PM
a reply to: barracuda7018

You know, there was a lot of anti-TSR.2 exaggerated nonsense around too as lobbyists tried (successfully) to kill the programme. You don't have to believe it all. I've researched this programme for several decades and I don't have either rose-tinted glasses or blinkers on. It is self evident (from proper consideration) that if pursued the TSR.2 would have been initially troublesome, probably late but would have evolved into a superb aircraft (exactly like the F-111 did). Cancelling TSR.2 for the F-111 was a calamitous mistake (ALL the reasons given for the decision were false). This is not to say the F-111 was bad, only that there was no need for the UK to do this as there was no benefit for us in doing it. The TSR.2 would have been a far superior aircraft to the current Tornado with greater payload, range and performance (same goes for F-111 which lacks only modern systems). The internal bay meant a provision for clean supersonic low level attacks or very long range unrefuelled missions, neither of which can be done by the Tornado, with everything it carries having to be hung on the outside and indicing drag. Even the Buccaneer is a superior airframe to the Tornado at low level and with any sort of load, which is ridiculous.

The notion of a report citing the TSR.2 having a life of ten years is a joke. The notion of the engines being obsolete is a joke (hmmm, 26 years on Concorde went remarkably well). Those claims remind me of the report given to Denis Healy in 1964 informing him that the wing had suffered structural failure while on test, this report failed to mentioned that is was a test to destruction and the structure had exceeded all expectations! The cancellation mafia, led by Louis Mountbatten, was very very methodical and influential. You are as unwise to believe all their claims as you would be to believe everyone who claims it was the greatest aeroplane ever made. Its cancellation WAS however a complete disaster for both the RAF and for BAC. There is no dressing that up.
edit on 27-3-2016 by waynos because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in