Mig-25 vs SR-71

page: 14
0
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 04:20 PM
link   
First - thanks guys for many interesting posts into this thread, give me hours of reading and now Im a bit more educated about these nice beautifull planes

Actually, I was spoted this thread when looking back for the Valkyrie site I once read and started to love such plane


And yea, I like it much more that the Blackbird, even it is faster and unlike the Valkyrie, it could maintain a little over Mach 3 speed - but still it did not look as great, as Valkyrie do

The plane is purrrfect

www.unrealaircraft.com...

About the Mach 6 - this is IMHO does belong to the sci-fi, since AFAIK the rockets have hard time to beat Mach 4 - for example the Russian Sunburns, that threat the US carriers (in fact, they are designed to take them out) have normal fly speed around 2,2 - 2,8 Mach (depending on type, configuration and warhead used - the atomic ones are lighter = slightly faster speed is possible) and closing to the ship at 3 to 3,3 Mach - and even doing "violent close-up manouvers" to prevent being shoot-down before reaching the impact area


Threfore Im very suspicious that anything could travel at Mach 6 at all - at least not close to Earth IMHO.

More informations about top speeds of rockets are welcome anyway





/me like to fly this bejby




posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Don't worry about the sunburns, the plalanx systems could engage them and defeat them. Im more worried about the US phasing out the phalanx in favor of the rotary rocket system. Nothing can get through the phalanx. Why change it.

Train



posted on Nov, 10 2005 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Probably because the SeaRAM and/or RAM, a variant of the Phalanx, is simply one awesome system within itself? 'Fire and Forget' to boot.
Russian "Sunburn" anti-ship missile threat neutralized
Phalanx and SeaRam Inner Layer Defence Systems





seekerof



posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 08:45 AM
link   
IMHO the best thing to do would be to integrate both systems. The phalanx has proven to be able to destory anything within very close range, at high manueverability. The SeaRAM is for longer range threats, but i dont think it has the ability to fulfil the extremely close range threats of a few supersonic missiles coming in. The SeaRAM may be fast, but the phalanx is QUICK. Quickness at very short range is better. To blaze a missile with a few hundred rounds of depleted uranium, awesome stuff.

Train



posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   
- Nothing can get through the phalanx. Why change it. -

This is a very dangerous attitude!
Nothing is invincible, and believe that our weapons are always the best is the prelude to disaster.

As regards the effectiveness of Phalanx/Aegis, look at the disaster with the USS Stark - eightiesclub.tripod.com...

That was a while ago. These days, missiles are smarter, faster and stealthier and several can be fired off in succession and programmed to arrive from different angles at literally the same second. Phalanx was not designed to deal with the modern threat, and upgrades are always going to be needed.



posted on Nov, 11 2005 @ 10:59 AM
link   
Very informative article wembley, I never knew that happened. I was only 5 yrs old then. As for the mirage being able to attack one of our naval vesels puzzles the hell out of me. What was this moron captain doing just sitting there letting this foreign plane fly right at them. He killed 37 of his sailors and he should have been put in jail for insubordinance. That plane should have been blown out of the sky when it approached within 90 miles max. The only way the phalanx could have failed would be that it was either turned off for some reason or just broken, which doesnt sound correct. Seems to me the real problem was the captian. If that weapon was turned on, it would have wasted that exocet.

Train



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
'If that weapon was turned on, it would have wasted that exocet. '

'If' is a big word. Technology is great when it works. During one action in the Falklands, a British frigate came under attack by Skyhawks. The Sea Dart decided not to work; they switched to the radar-guided 4.5" gun which jammed after a few rounds. Then the Skyhawks got within range of the Sea Wolf (point defence missile) which took out the first wave; unfortunately the second wave started weaving and the Sea Wolf software decided they were not a valid target. The crew watched the launchers return to the neutral position and switch off as the Skyhawks came in.
The ship was hit by two bombs. As luck was have it they were fused incorrectly and didn't go off.

SNAFU all round...my point being that you can't rely on anything working 100%



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 12:53 PM
link   
the only ships in the falklands with seawolf were Andromeda ,Broadsword and Brilliant

and 1 bomb went through broadsword completely and hit the sea!! but thats (and a straffing run) a few days previously was the only damage she sustained



posted on Nov, 12 2005 @ 01:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigTrain
What was this moron captain doing just sitting there letting this foreign plane fly right at them. He killed 37 of his sailors and he should have been put in jail for insubordinance. That plane should have been blown out of the sky when it approached within 90 miles max. Seems to me the real problem was the captian. If that weapon was turned on, it would have wasted that exocet.

Train




Just as well you aren't in charge of anything like that or the US would be at war with everyone!


Insubordinace is a refusal to carry out orders, incompetence maybe applicable.

But the radar on both AWACs and on the ship never detected the missiles - and you blindly assume that the phlanx system would have worked where it seems other systems totally failed in their job. To assume something is nigh on invincible is dangerous...



posted on Dec, 9 2005 @ 09:08 AM
link   
That's alright. I understand it is a tough ask to get a SR-71 down by a Mig-25. But what about the latest Russian SAM which are intended to knock down even non-strategic ballistic missile going as fast as 5km/sec or roughly 15 Mach. The range and alititude (200 Km and 40 Km respectively) of these 4th generation
(S-400 Triumph) missiles are also sufficient enough to chase and reach the Black bird. One has to keep in mind that no matter how powerful the engines of SR-71 could be, still it can't be a match with the Solid Rocket Motors that these SAMs most certainly employ. I think this is the real reason for the early retirement of the SR-71.

www.warfare.ru...



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 03:51 PM
link   
Since these s-400 missiles have not been challenged or tested against a mach 3+ plane at 100,000 feet, I'm not sure they can hit the sr-71. Again, russian speculation, unless theres a successfu test im not aware of?!?!?

Train



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 04:17 PM
link   
How did the SR-71 retire early? decades of service took its toll on the high performance airframe. Besides, its replacement was alive, and there was no need.



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 04:43 PM
link   
I guess the SR-71 retired early because it was simply not cost effective to operate anymore. Why send 2 people 90,000 feet into the atmosphere strapped into a 30 year old rocket when you can have newer, better spy satellites do a better job for you? Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the 71, but i guess i can see where the air force is coming from......
And i believe that there are two -71's still flying, one for NASA and one for the NOAA.



posted on Dec, 10 2005 @ 08:00 PM
link   
as stated before, the actual speed (as with the total ceiling) is classified. they can say whatever the he** they want but they will still not tell the exact truth.



posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 03:16 PM
link   
I think the replacement of the SR 71 is a super stealthy UAV with a slow topspeed with a high endurance.



posted on Dec, 11 2005 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by BuddhaSmiling
That's alright. I understand it is a tough ask to get a SR-71 down by a Mig-25. But what about the latest Russian SAM which are intended to knock down even non-strategic ballistic missile going as fast as 5km/sec or roughly 15 Mach. The range and alititude (200 Km and 40 Km respectively) of these 4th generation
(S-400 Triumph) missiles are also sufficient enough to chase and reach the Black bird. One has to keep in mind that no matter how powerful the engines of SR-71 could be, still it can't be a match with the Solid Rocket Motors that these SAMs most certainly employ. I think this is the real reason for the early retirement of the SR-71.


The SR-71 was retired decades ago, long before the S-400 ever came out. The main reason the SR-71 was retired was the increasing capacity of spy satellites to gather information and beam it back in realtime.



posted on Jan, 14 2007 @ 12:58 AM
link   
Wow, fascinating input over on the anonymous section:
www.abovetopsecret.com...


it isn't possible for the sr-71 to move along at over m3.44 becuase the jp-7's flashpoint which is used to cool the leading edges would be reached causing the entire aircraft to ignite. I know this aircraft like the back of my hand and the top speed isn't as high as many think. [...]
The discovery of these tactics at the arrival of the mig-31 warrented the shut-down of the SR-71 program as it was now useless.



Makes some interesting statements that you guys might like to respond to.



posted on Jan, 14 2007 @ 03:35 AM
link   
hmm,i wasnt aware that they used the jp-7 to cool the leading edges? I know its used to cool the main components in and around the engine though. Anyone here know if its true? I would look myself but after work,the brain is kinda fried.



posted on Jan, 14 2007 @ 11:54 AM
link   


trodas said:
About the Mach 6 - this is IMHO does belong to the sci-fi, since AFAIK the rockets have hard time to beat Mach 4 - for example the Russian Sunburns.


The X-15 was able to reach M6.7 way back in 1967.

October 3, 1967
Pete Knight nearly incinerates tail at Mach 6.7



The airplane first set speed records in the Mach 4-6 range with Mach 4.43 on March 7, 1961; Mach 5.27 on June 23, 1961; Mach 6.04 on November 9, 1961; and Mach 6.7 on October 3, 1967.


Granted, the X-15 was not an airbreather; but if they were able to create something capable of moving at those velocities at the time as well as withstand the temperature generated by the airframe moving at such high speeds -- then I wonder what they have now (perhaps as substitute to the SR-71).



posted on Jan, 14 2007 @ 11:58 AM
link   
If you don't mind spending a ton of money I suggest you read Sled Driver, and The Untouchables by Brian Schull. He was a Blackbird pilot and he has some interesting things to say about flying the bird. Some amazing pictures in the books as well. One of the most amazing pictures I've ever seen is the self portrait he did at altitude.





top topics
 
0
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join