Fifth generation of 50 fighters years

86


Ten years do not cease disputes around odious F-22 "Raptor". The appearance of the F-35 “Lightning II” - the “budget” version of a generation fighter — added fuel to the fire: if even the large and expensive “Raptor” does not always meet the requirements, then what can we expect from a single-engine fighter with a limited range of onboard equipment? In general, the “fifth generation” is born in terrible agony - the demands made on such fighters are very vague, and sometimes impossible to implement in practice.
One of the main conditions is to reduce the visibility of the aircraft in the radar and thermal ranges. The second condition: supersonic cruising speed. The third is super-maneuverability. Often these three factors are “mutually exclusive paragraphs”: powerful engines and perfect aerodynamics conflict with the requirements of the stealth technology. In addition, the fifth generation fighter should be equipped with the most modern avionics and be easy to pilot.
Meanwhile, even 50 years ago, a serial aircraft was created that meets the many requirements of the “fifth generation” and flew in supersonic cruise mode. As you may have guessed, it will be about the A-5 “Vigilante” deck bomber.

When ballistic missiles were small, and Yuri Gagarin was still in school, the United States and the Soviet Union were faced with the urgent problem of delivering nuclear weapons. US put on strategic bombers, aircraft carriers and deck Aviation. In 1953, the North American aircraft manufacturer, on its own initiative, began work on the search for a promising replacement for the A-3 Skyworior subsonic bomber.
The company was not mistaken - in 1955, the US Navy officially announced a competition for the creation of just such an aircraft. The engineers were given a task comparable in complexity to the creation of a “fifth generation fighter”: the NAGPAW project (North American General Purpose Attack Weapon) involved the development of a supersonic all-weather strike aircraft capable of operating from the decks of heavy aircraft carriers like Forrestal. The only task of the aircraft was the delivery of nuclear ammunition to targets in the enemy’s territory.
In August, 1958, the new aircraft made its first flight, and a year later the Navy signed a contract for the supply of 55 supersonic carrier-based bombers weaponswho received the terrible name A-5 "Vigilanti" ("participant of the Lynch Court"). Marine pilots liked the new technique: in 1960, one of the “vigilantes” set a world record, rising to a height of 28 kilometers from 1000 kg of cargo.

Fifth generation of 50 fighters years


You will laugh, but the A-5 aircraft created half a century ago did indeed meet most of the requirements for modern fifth-generation fighters:
Vigilanti realized without problems a supersonic cruising flight mode (2000 km / h at an altitude of 11000 m).
Moreover, the deck-based bomber had an important constructive element characteristic of the modern technology “stealth” - the placement of standard weapons on the internal suspension. An internal bomb bay was integrated between the two engines in the fuselage, which contained two 1000-pound bombs (2х450 kg). From the point of view of the “stealth” technology, the all-round vertical tail also contributed to the reduction of the aircraft’s radar visibility.

There was also some semblance of “supermodernity”: a heavy “vigilante” more than once participated in training fights with fighters, achieving phenomenal results. Already on the third bend, the Vigilanti hit the deck of the F-8 Krusader (Crusader) fighter and could chase it for a long time.
The super-bomber had good dynamics and acceleration properties, the climb rate of easily equipped Vigilanti reached 172 m / s. Practical ceiling - 19000-20000 meters. In theory, the bomber was calculated for more, but the basing on the deck of an aircraft carrier worsened its flight characteristics. In order to reduce the area occupied by the aircraft on the deck, the wing ends using hydraulic actuators were folded up, and the upper part of the keel was deflected to the side. We had to drag a heavy tail hook (landing hook), and the Vigilanti design and chassis were designed for high dynamic loads when landing on the deck of the ship, which resulted in an even greater increase in the weight of the airframe (it was forbidden to use titanium in the aircraft design).



Vigilante was a very large, heavy and extremely high-tech product for its time. He carried a whole range of innovative solutions: bucket-like adjustable air intakes, roll spoilers, instead of classic aileron, and even an on-board computer (hung every 15 minutes). For the first time in aviation, the aircraft was equipped with an electric remote control system (there was no mechanical connection between the rudders and the steering wheel). Like any deck aircraft of the US Navy, the Vigilanti received a system for refueling in the air. As a result, the price of the "vigilante" has risen to 100 million dollars in today's prices. By the way, Americans are still confident that the MiG-25 interceptor is copied from the A-5, although the external similarity still does not mean anything.
When meeting with the A-5 bomber, you cannot immediately guess that the car is double. Only one seat is visible behind the glazing of the cockpit canopy. The second crew member, the navigator, is sitting somewhere in the fuselage of the aircraft. His presence is given out by two tiny portholes on the sides of a bomber.


Cockpit cockpit


And then there was a misunderstanding: in the 1960, the underwater strategic missile carrier "George Washington" with the Polaris ballistic missiles came out for combat patrols. The rapid evolution of rocket technology put an end to the Vigilanti project, making the placement of nuclear weapons on the decks of aircraft carriers ineffective. Super hero was out of work ...
An attempt to adapt the Viglante to the performance of percussion tasks was a fiasco - even with the use of additional external pylons for the suspension of weapons, the heavy aircraft lost in efficiency to the Phantom fighter-bomber.

A small remark. With the beginning of the Vietnam War, it turned out that the US Navy had a lot of different technology, but there was not a single normal strike aircraft: the SkyHock lightweight cheap А-4 was too weak, and besides, it could not work at night and in adverse weather conditions. "Phantom", despite the stated "universality" and "all-weather" not far from the "Skyhawk". All-weather aircraft in bad weather does not fly (Murphy's law). The military was not satisfied with either the combat load of the “Phantom” or its too high speed, which made it impossible to defeat point targets. An attempt to reanimate the ancient piston A-1 "Skyrider" (a kind of deck IL-2) gave a limited positive result - he could not replace the jet aircraft. Well, chasing the trucks on the Ho Chi Minh trail on a huge Vigilanti was complete madness. It was necessary to urgently launch the A-6 “Intruder” subsonic attack attack aircraft of the carrier-based platform with a powerful sighting system and a combat load of 8 tons. But this was not enough - in the future, they designed another light fire support machine, the A-7 Corsair, based on the Kruseyder F-8 fighter.

By that time, the 63 A-5 "Vigilante" bomber was added to the deck aviation structure. Satisfied North American managers went to drink Martini to the Hawaiian Islands: they fulfilled the contract, the rest is not their problem. And sea pilots were sorry to abandon brand new cars with unique flight characteristics. It was necessary to think of something urgently.
“You will go to the scouts!” Decided the naval experts, strictly looking at the crooked recruit. And "Vigilanti" did not shame their expectations, turning into a specialized long-range reconnaissance RA-5C. (the letter "R", from the English word reconnaissance always means reconnaissance modification). In the internal bomb bay they put cameras, additional fuel tanks and covered this equipment with an enlarged fairing.


The photo gives an idea of ​​the dimensions of the Vigilante. The folded side of the keel is clearly visible.


With the outbreak of active hostilities in Southeast Asia, the Vigilanti became the “eyes” fleet - As part of the wing of each aircraft carrier, there was always a RA-5C link. Deck scouts hung for hours over the positions of the North Vietnamese army, photographing targets before and after air strikes. In the second case, work was associated with a particular risk - the Vietnamese air defense was in a state of full combat readiness and was filled with a thirst for revenge. The "vigilantes" were saved only by 2M speed and maximum flight altitude. And that is not always - the wreckage of 27 Vigilanti fell in the jungle.
RA-5C performed well in a new role; in the middle of 60, the fleet ordered a new batch of reconnaissance aircraft. North American turned on the conveyor and stamped another 91 Vigilanti. Aircraft of this type flew until the end of the 70-ies and were decommissioned in November 1979. AT stories they remained as naval aviation as sophisticated aircraft on which new technologies and ideas were developed. The pilots still remember with surprise how these monsters were put on deck (although this is not the limit - in the fall of 1963, the Hercules military transport aircraft made 20 successful landings on an aircraft carrier).



You probably noticed, dear readers, that this story was written with a bit of irony. Of course, the A-5 "Vigilante" did not stand close to the fifth-generation fighter. Despite the same wing load with the Su-35 (380 kg / sq. Meter), the low weight of the Vigilanti did not allow him to perform the Pugachev Cobra or other most complex aerobatics. As for the comparison of avionics - I suppose there are no comments here.

But the fact that 50 years ago, managed to create a combat aircraft, many of the features of which correspond to the fifth-generation fighter, makes you wonder. At the same time, the Vigilante was designed as a double bomber, and its designers did not even have thoughts of super-maneuverability or notorious stealth. Modern engineers lead the battle for supersonic without the use of afterburner, the best minds solve the problem of stealth, for example, where to find a place under the internal weapons compartment. And often, possessing state-of-the-art computer-aided design systems, new materials and nanotechnologies, they cannot cope with this task. It is amazing how the creators of Vigilante managed to achieve such amazing results with the help of primitive technical solutions.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

86 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    4 August 2012 10: 12
    The division into generations is conditional. As a rule, the transition to a new generation of aviation complexes indicates the emergence of new properties of the complex or the transition of "old" properties to a higher level.
  2. Diesel
    +8
    4 August 2012 10: 23
    did not allow him to perform "Cabra Pugacheva"

    Eyed

    And on the plane, another good project for an unnecessary aircraft with good flying qualities, of which there were dozens in the USSR and the USA.
    1. Rider
      -18
      4 August 2012 13: 36
      Quote: Diesel
      , another good project for an unnecessary aircraft with good flight qualities, of which there were dozens in the USSR and the USA


      Yeah! That's where the legs of the MIG-25 grow ...

      MIG-25 (1969)
      Speed ​​- Mach 2,8
      Ceiling - 23 km
      Laaamp Aviation
      Theft of Belenko MIG-25 to Japan
      ... and that’s it. Nothing more this plane unimpressive

      Vigillent (1959)
      Speed ​​- Mach 2.1
      Ceiling - 28 kilometers
      + Deck-based
      + Air refueling system
      + Innovative design
      + Created 10 years earlier
      1. +9
        4 August 2012 13: 55
        I knew that there would definitely be someone who would compare the MiG-25, Vigillent and F-15 ...
        1) Aircraft have a different purpose
        2) Aircraft have a fundamentally different design and are similar only to the general aerodynamic design.
        3) What was the lamp on the MiG-25?
        4) Regarding the remarkableness of the MiG-25 - ask at the Israeli Air Force office. There they will answer that they were flying, they couldn’t bring them down. Anyway, who built these machines in series? (Americans with A-12 / SR-71 do not count, because this small-scale production can be called a stretch)
        5) What is so innovative about Vigillent's design?
        1. Rider
          -8
          4 August 2012 14: 17
          Quote: Zerstorer
          1) Aircraft have a different purpose

          Still would. The American engineers had a much more difficult task - to adapt the aircraft for an aircraft carrier

          Quote: Zerstorer
          2) Aircraft have a fundamentally different design and are similar only to the general aerodynamic design.

          Aircraft have the same design, the same aerodynamic design and look like twins (vysokoplan. Bucket-shaped air intakes. The shape of the wing profiles and the fuselage). Initially, two keels were planned for Vigillent.

          Quote: Zerstorer
          3) What was the lamp on the MiG-25?

          On-board computer AVM-25. 1978, shame, comrades

          Quote: Zerstorer
          Regarding the remarkableness of the MiG-25, ask at the Israel Air Force office. There they will answer that they were flying, they couldn’t bring them down

          So there was no harm from them.

          Quote: Zerstorer
          Anyway, who built these machines in series?

          It was just that the USSR had nothing better.
          When the F-15 in Lebanon split the latest Soviet technology, everyone was surprised how it was like this: the F-15 first flight in 1972, the MIG-23 in 1969, the MIG-25 was put into service in 1969. Essentially peers, and the F-15 is a completely different generation aircraft.

          Quote: Zerstorer
          What is so innovative about Vigillent's design?

          All
          1. +6
            4 August 2012 15: 54
            Quote: Ryder
            Aircraft have the same design, the same aerodynamic design and look like twins (vysokoplan. Bucket-shaped air intakes. The shape of the wing profiles and the fuselage).

            Air intakes, yes. Are you sure the wing profiles are the same? And the fuselage contours?
            The same design is generally nonsense. The MiG-25 glider is built of steel using welding.
          2. +5
            4 August 2012 19: 18
            Quote: Ryder
            When the F-15 in Lebanon chopped up the latest Soviet technology
            , the latest, after the rebirth of aircraft design bureaus, the states didn’t have a grunt, he weird
            Quote: Ryder
            So there was no harm from them.
            he was not allowed to be harmed by "politicians", or rather the Israeli lobby in the Kremlin, and the Union was not mean by nature, unlike opponents, they would not be shy
            1. Rider
              -5
              5 August 2012 11: 39
              Quote: AlexxxNik
              the states didn’t have Khrushchev;

              And why immediately Khrushchev? Maybe you should start with Stalin?

              “The investigator asked“ Would you like some water? ”And broke a decanter on my head with the words:“ Your firecrackers and pyrotechnics are unnecessary for the Soviet Union. ”(From the memoirs of Sergei Korolev) In 1937, Grigory Langemak, the creator of the BM-13 Katyusha, the favorite technique of drunkards, was spread Stalinists

              Quote: AlexxxNik
              and the Union was not weak by nature, unlike opponents, they would not be shy

              Budapest fights in the night
              The whole city in the ring of barricades .... (the author was given a year for each line)
              1. 0
                6 August 2012 12: 47
                yes, we bombed the Czechs right in the Stone Age, and the author was given little, given that the result of their activity was the death of a society alternative to the west, and about that investigator-enthusiast, I would not be surprised if he himself ended up with a hole in the back of his head
          3. +9
            5 August 2012 12: 42
            On-board computer AVM-25. 1978, shame, comrades

            It’s a shame to try to suck us in. I’m getting a shame. The lamps were used there quite deliberately as being more resistant to an electromagnetic pulse and in terms of mass and size characteristics were comparable to the semiconductor transistors of those times.
      2. +7
        4 August 2012 15: 43
        Quote: Ryder
        MIG-25 (1969)

        Start of development -1961 (decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the Council of Ministers of the USSR), the first flight - 1964, adoption - 1969 (in the form of a scout)
        Quote: Ryder
        Vigillent (1959) ... Ceiling - 28 kilometers

        practical ceiling - 19-20 km, 28 km - lift height due to the stock of kinetic energy (MiG-25 - 37 km)
        1. Rider
          -9
          4 August 2012 16: 53
          Quote: Alex
          Start of development -1961

          That's right, the development of the MiG-25 began in the year when the Viglent entered service.

          Quote: Alex
          practical ceiling - 19-20 km

          Like the MIG-25

          Quote: Alex
          28 km - lift height due to the stock of kinetic energy (MiG-25 - 37 km)

          37 km - this record was not set by a production car, but by the prototype E-266, without weapons and load
          Viglent has a more complex, durable and heavy construction, because it is a carrier-based aircraft. MIG engineers in the worst dreams would not dream that the MIG-25 is landing on an aircraft carrier

          [img] http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RA-5C_Vigilante.jpg?uselang=en [/ img]
          1. +11
            4 August 2012 18: 52
            A completely different design - nothing to do with the MiG-25. You have glitches - dear. Or, as always, the desire to wishful thinking. But the combat load of Vegelent is impressive, impressive ... Awesome "design", so many bells and whistles to "drag" 900 kg ... at a time when in those days, combat aircraft dragged a little more ... nude, nude .. . awesome design - you can't say anything ...

            37 km - this record was not set by a production car, but by the prototype E-266, without weapons and load


            "Vidzhelent", in the same way, was preparing to take an altitude of 28 km. We must live with our eyes wide shut in order to assert, in our right mind and sober memory, that "record" planes were somehow prepared differently in the USA than in the USSR. In general, Dear - you, as always, want to be a greater Catholic than the Pope himself ...
            1. Rider
              -5
              5 August 2012 11: 43
              Quote: de_monSher
              But the combat load of the Vegelent is impressive, impressive ... Awesome "design", so many bells and whistles to "carry" 900 kg ...

              This is in the internal bomb bay

              Quote: de_monSher
              "Vidzhelent", in the same way, was preparing to take an altitude of 28 km. We have to live with our eyes wide shut in order to assert, in our right mind and sober memory, that “record” planes were somehow prepared differently in the USA than in the USSR

              The record was set by SERIAL Vigilent, who after the record returned to the deck of the aircraft carrier "Saratoga"
              The record prototype MIG-25 - E-266, has never been shown in the army. Specialized car for records.

              Vigillent climbed to a height with a load of 1 ton
              1. +3
                5 August 2012 18: 36
                You are incorrigible, Ryder ... *)))

                In the same way, we can say that the record was set by the "Serial" MiG-25, called the E-266 for the record, which, after breaking the records, also returned to the base airfield = laughing =. Shake your head, Ryder. It is overgrown with propaganda, and is saturated with love for the "Empire of Absolute Evil" - the United States.

                This is in the internal bomb bay


                I tried very carefully to find pylons for external suspension in the presented photographs of Vidzhelent - and I found it. If you would be so kind as to point your fingers at them, I will be very grateful to you. Thanks in advance... *))
                1. Rider
                  -5
                  5 August 2012 19: 57
                  Quote: de_monSher
                  "Serial" MiG-25, called the E-266 for the record, which, after breaking the records, also returned to the airfield = laughing =


                  Why clowning. E-266 is a record car that never left testing centers. Vigillente was a production model, both before and after the record, which was serviced by an aircraft carrier. Dot.

                  Quote: de_monSher
                  I tried very carefully to find pylons for external suspension in the presented photographs of "Vidzhelenta"

                  So these are pictures of the RA-5C scout (with gargot under the fuselage)
                  Pictures of the A-5 bomber are quite rare and you probably haven’t seen them. Official figures - 1800 kg bomb load.
                  1. +2
                    5 August 2012 20: 09
                    ] Vigillente was a production model, both before and after the record, which was hijacked on an aircraft carrier. Dot.


                    Rather, it is still so ... *))

                    You yourself began to compare mmmmmmm ... an ear with a finger, while with sincere zeal, distorting the facts. The plane is beautiful, and for its time - advanced. Dot.

                    Your comparisons are so far-fetched, and it was not for nothing that I put a photo of the Su-24. If you wish, you can find similarities. And any aircraft is preparing for record flights. And I remember very well what the designation E means in the marking of Soviet aircraft. The ellipsis ...

                    Do you understand what I'm talking about? *)))
                  2. Passing
                    +2
                    6 August 2012 00: 47
                    Quote: Ryder
                    Why clowning. E-266 is a record car that never left testing centers. Vigillente was a production model, both before and after the record, which was serviced by an aircraft carrier.

                    Your logic is not clear, why is the serial A-5 climbing 28 km better than the serial E-266 climbing 37 km? Nothing so that nine kilometers difference ?! Do you know how much the Mig-25 can jump from a ton load? No? Then what are we arguing about?
                    In addition, aircraft flying in two missions a wagon and a small truck, starting with the MiG-21, the same 59 years of adoption, and aircraft flying about three missiles, only two, ours and SR-71, and the MiG-25 is the only combat at that speed.
                    1. Rider
                      -4
                      6 August 2012 15: 31
                      Quote: Passing by
                      aircraft flying in two swoops a wagon and a small cart, starting with the Mig-21

                      Vigillent flew in supersonic in CRUISE mode
                      Quote: Passing by
                      why the serial A-5 climbed 28 km is better than the serial E-266

                      The fact that this is a serial aircraft. 156 Vigillents were built and EVERYONE was able to jump so high
                      E-266 was one or two record copies
                      Quote: Passing by
                      and there are about three planes flying, just two, ours and SR-71, and the MiG-25 is the only combat aircraft at that speed.

                      Limit for MIG-25: could fly with a speed of 2,8M for no more than 8 minutes
                      SR-71: could fly at a speed of 3,2M 3 hours
                      Did you know about such a nuance? laughing
                      1. +4
                        6 August 2012 17: 32
                        Rider, - I understand everything ... all your disputes, sincere attachment to the USA, admiration for the genius of American engineers, - it happens that everyone goes crazy in his own way, even in such a completely incomprehensible way ... BUT ...

                        I have already been "slapped" with three warnings for the "disrespectful" attitude towards you - and I think it is completely unfair. Since I quite tolerantly asked you if you are gay, based on your behavior and the absolute lack of logic. But it is not important. Another thing is important. In any circumstances, to you, very politely, All (!), Turn to "you". You stubbornly "poke" everyone. Who are we to you - godfathers, brothers, matchmakers? In essence, I understand that the ideal for you is the USA - an absolutely cultureless country, where there is not even the concept of humanity, there is only the concept of benefit and self-promotion. But this does not change the essence - I would still advise you to change the manner of communication. Strongly advised. Here you are not there. Quite smart, good and calm people with a good sense of humor have gathered here. Be so kind dear Rider... You can forgive the donkey stubbornness, and in the obvious "little things" - as they say, the grave will correct the hunchback, but the polite manner of speaking, you can make it your style of communication ... *))) It seems to me ... this is the main culture indicator ... *)
                      2. Passing
                        +2
                        6 August 2012 19: 52
                        Quote: Ryder
                        Vigillent flew in supersonic in CRUISE mode

                        Let's define the terminology. In my understanding (in the context of 5th generation aircraft) cruising is a flight on afterburner engines. Was the A-5 flying in super sound without afterburner ?! Something I have never met a mention of this. Dissuade me, give me a link.
                        Quote: Ryder
                        156 Vigillents were built and EVERYONE was able to jump so high

                        What prevented to lighten the A-5 and jump on the same 37km? Obviously, aerodynamics, including controllability in the stratosphere and the inability of engines to such heights. However, since you do not intuitively understand the fundamental, just gigantic, difference between 28 and 37 km, then let's take a look at the performance characteristics of production aircraft:
                        A-5 Vigillent
                        http://www.airwar.ru/enc/attack/a5.html
                        Practical ceiling - 19505 m
                        MiG-25P
                        http://www.airwar.ru/enc/fighter/mig25.html
                        Practical ceiling - 20700 m
                        MiG-25RB
                        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CC%E8%C3-25
                        Practical ceiling - 23000 m
                        The conclusion is 100% obvious, Vigilante nervously smokes on the sidelines.
                        Quote: Ryder
                        Limit for MIG-25: could fly with a speed of 2,8M for no more than 8 minutes

                        In these eight minutes he will fly 400 km. Where is he more? I will repeat once again - there is no sense in a fighter interceptor flying from Moscow to Vladivostok, during this time all enemy targets will be bombed and scattered. Just take a map of Russia and draw a radius of 500-600km (taking into account climb and acceleration). The diameter strongly covers the distance from Moscow to the borders with Belarus or Ukraine. More than enough.
                        Quote: Ryder
                        SR-71: could fly at a speed of 3,2M 3 hours

                        What's the point? Satellites fly much faster and longer. Well, it flies for three hours at such a speed, and so what? Can he bomb someone? Can I bring down a plane? Ah, he can take a picture of something there! But will he be able to convey these pictures back, will he deflect an air defense missile?
                        He does not have a radar, and in principle it is impossible to put it, because the nose is heated at 500 degrees. In addition, only one and a half to two hours fly at one gas station SR-71. And even more than that, with full refueling, this supersonic fuel tank cannot even take off, at first it takes off with half-empty tanks, and it is completely refueling already in the air! It's just a circus with horses of some kind and not a military machine!
                        The MiG-25 is a real combat vehicle, and the SR-71 is a stupid race car for show-offs.
                      3. Rider
                        -4
                        6 August 2012 20: 53
                        So, we have the following situation:
                        1958, Vigillent appears - a brilliant aircraft for its time. With his main task - the use of A-bombs, he coped perfectly well. Plus a long service as a scout.

                        1969 - the "pride" of the Soviet aviation MIG-25 begins to enter the troops
                        1972 - F-4 15th generation fighter made its first flight.

                        Conclusion: MIG-25 LATE AS MINIMUM FOR 10 YEARS, this overgrowth appeared too late and there was no more sense from it than from a rusty bucket. It could still compete with Vijlent - this is its technological level (although even the obviously older A-5 machine has many technical advantages over the MIG-25). There was not enough for a larger MiG-25. In short, the MIG-25 did not appear at the right time, in the United States at the end of the 60s, F-15 vehicles with combat characteristics of a completely different level were developed. As expected, having met in battle a few years later, the Needles smashed to smithereens the latest Soviet equipment.

                        Quote: Passing by
                        MiG-25 real combat vehicle

                        Prosr @ making all the battles

                        Quote: Passing by
                        SR-71: could fly at a speed of 3,2M 3 hours
                        What's the point? Satellites fly much faster and longer. Well, it flies for three hours at such a speed, and what

                        laughing
                        The satellite was DISPOSABLE in the years 60-70 - photographed - and dropped the container with photos
                        So the SR-71 is a real combat intelligence, EMNIP about 1000 sorties over Vietnam + flights over the countries of the socialist camp. Efficiency of information, complete security due to unique characteristics. new technologies
                        And of course, the SR-71 set a record for airspeed - and what if capabilities allow ...
                      4. 0
                        6 August 2012 21: 00
                        The satellite was DISPOSABLE in the years 60-70 - photographed - and dropped the container with photos


                        Mdya ... after this phrase, you are reluctant to talk with you ... *))))

                        Firstly, when looking at which satellite, you need to know its apogee and overheat. And from this to dance - how long will he live ... *) So - la-la, no need. At the end of the 90s, the first "Lightnings" were dangling in orbit, quite workable, you ask them - "Who are you, what are you doing there?", He reports - "Satellite Cosmos, such and such, is ready to flop to the specified point planets! "... *))) Like shas - I don't know, it is ... *)))

                        Damn ... There are smart people, and there are people - Bots ... and the latter, lately more and more ... = waved = = sorry, I thought you had at least a little something under the skull. .. I thought a worthy opponent ... but it turned out - a larva, infusorin ... *)))
                      5. Eugene
                        0
                        7 August 2012 23: 36
                        you didn’t go there at all. a leading question on the film at least once filmed? It is desirable as an advanced amateur but not soap dish + Kodak Gold + minilab?
                      6. -1
                        6 August 2012 22: 50
                        Quote: Ryder
                        complete safety thanks to unique characteristics. new technologies

                        Of the entire fleet of these aircraft, a third is lost in accidents.
                      7. Rider
                        -4
                        7 August 2012 01: 15
                        Quote: Bad_gr
                        Of the total fleet of these aircraft, a third is lost in accidents


                        But not from the actions of the enemy!
                        And the MIG-25s went astray
                      8. Passing
                        +1
                        7 August 2012 01: 16
                        Quote: Ryder
                        So, we have the following situation:
                        1958, Vigillent appears - a brilliant aircraft for its time. With his main task - the use of A-bombs, he coped perfectly well. Plus a long service as a scout.
                        1969 - the "pride" of the Soviet aviation MIG-25 begins to enter the troops
                        1972 - F-4 15th generation fighter made its first flight.

                        Rider, I'm sure you're constantly winning cards. Guessed? And you know how I know - you are constantly cheating, apparently on the machine. wink
                        If you have already given the first flight for the US aircraft of the year, give the same data for our aircraft:
                        1958 - the first flight of the A-5
                        1964 - the first flight of the MiG-25
                        1972 - the first flight of the F-15
                        Those. The MiG appeared six years after Vigillent, and Eagle as much as EIGHT years after the MiG. So a certain advantage of the F-15 over the MiG-25 seems to be natural, almost ten years of difference. But is there anyway? How about the MiG-31 (first flight in 1975), with its super-radar super-radar and super-rockets with a range of 200 km at that time?
                        Quote: Ryder
                        As expected, having met in battle a few years later, the Needles smashed to smithereens the latest Soviet equipment.

                        This is about the Arabs and the Israelis, as I understand it? Reading bikes from Israel is certainly interesting, but they are bikes. Just try to reflect on such facts: both in Iraq and the Arabs, the technique was the same, but the Israelis are unbridledly promoting that they won the last wars with a dry account, and in Iraq, i.e. in ten years, i.e. Western technology has become even more advanced, the Western coalition has lost as many as 75 aircraft! So your propaganda rehashings do not personally impress me.
                        Quote: Ryder
                        Prosr @ making all the battles

                        Once again - only in CNN-type murzilkas. However, CNN sometimes messes up, and we still had to admit that some "rusty bucket" of the sixties made it easy for the newest, ultramodern F-18 at that time to be the first Iraqi one. And how many more lost coalition aircraft are vaguely designated as "presumably shot down by anti-aircraft fire", "fell due to fuel consumption," "premature detonation of dropped bombs." This cheating is impressive only for young children, and adults can read between the lines .. laughing
                      9. Rider
                        -4
                        7 August 2012 15: 44
                        Quote: Passing by
                        Those. The MiG appeared six years after Vigillent, and Eagle as much as EIGHT years after the MiG. But is there anyway? How about the MiG-31 (first flight in 1975), with its super-radar super-radar and super-rockets with a range of 200 km at that time?

                        Vigillent:
                        beginning of development - 1953
                        first flight - 1958 year
                        in service - since 1961

                        MIG-25
                        development began in 1961 (8 years later!)
                        first flight - 1964 year
                        in service - since 1970 (9 years later!)

                        F-15 "Eagle" (of course, copied by the pendocs from the mig-25, stolen by Belenko in 1976)
                        beginning of development - 1965
                        first flight - 1972 year
                        in service - 1976

                        What is the conclusion? MIG-25 began to design 10 years later, aircraft of its technical level flew off in the 60s, the MIG-25 entered service in 1970 and was mass-produced (hurray patriots are proud of it) until the beginning of the 80s.

                        And as for the "not having" analogues of the MIG-31 radar, it's a shame to even comment on anything. MIG-31 did not participate in any battle, and for some reason it always happens that the newest Soviet junk, "having no analogues", breaks to smithereens every time in a real battle. This was the case with the BT-7 tanks, this was the case with the Kub air defense systems, this was the case with the MiG-23 and MiG-25


                        Quote: Passing by
                        both in Iraq and the Arabs the technique was the same, but the Israelis were unbridledly promoting that they had won the last wars with a dry bill, and in Iraq, i.e. in ten years, i.e. Western technology has become even more advanced, the Western coalition has lost as many as 75 aircraft!

                        Your lie.
                        1967 - surprise attack. single aviation losses of israel
                        1973 - the attack of the Arabs, Israeli aircraft suffered heavy losses (a ratio of about 1: 4 in favor of Israel, this is the true price of Soviet military trash)
                        1991 Desert Storm, Coalition official casualties - 49 aircraft

                        Quote: Passing by
                        "presumably shot down by anti-aircraft fire", "fell due to fuel consumption", "premature detonation of dropped bombs".

                        Your lie. There is nothing of the kind, the patriots come up with this, attribute this nonsense to the USA, and they themselves begin to argue with it.
                      10. Rider
                        -3
                        7 August 2012 15: 46
                        Quote: Passing by
                        "rusty bucket" of the sixties in the light ukontropuyu the newest, ultramodern for those times F-18

                        The F-18 is a deck-based attack aircraft, the strongest car in its class, but declare. that it’s a super fighter, at least stupid. The deck always has limited performance characteristics in front of the F-15 and F-16
                        The only accidental victory of the MIG-25, the remaining 1000 MIGs quietly rotted in the dump, a couple of dozen more "unparalleled" MIG-25s were killed in air battles
                      11. Eugene
                        0
                        7 August 2012 23: 09
                        Then plus drone.
                      12. Passing
                        +1
                        8 August 2012 01: 39
                        Quote: Ryder
                        And as for the "not having" analogues of the MIG-31 radar, it's a shame to even comment on anything.

                        I understand that I am also swimming on some issues, but this is not a reason to be ashamed, because I will help you broaden your horizons:
                        http://paralay.com/allocer_tab.xls
                        MiG-31
                        H007 Barrier
                        Year - 1981
                        Antenna Type - PFAR
                        Instrument range - 300 km
                        Istr. 4-gen (5 sq. M) - 130 km
                        1 m2 of faculty (4+ generation) - 87 km
                        -----
                        MiG-31M
                        Barrier-M
                        Year - 1984
                        Antenna Type - PFAR
                        Instrument range - 360 km
                        Istr. 4-gen (5 sq. M) - 230 km
                        1 m2 of faculty (4+ generation) - 154 km
                        -----
                        MiG-31BM
                        Barrier-AM
                        Year - 2010
                        Antenna Type - HEADLIGHT
                        Instrument range - 360 km
                        Istr. 4-gen (5 sq. M) - 367 km
                        1 m2 of faculty (4+ generation) - 246 km
                        -----
                        F-15A / B and F-15 C / D
                        AN / APG-63
                        Year - 1979 final edition with software processor
                        Antenna Type - SCHAR
                        Instrument range - 200 km
                        Istr. 4-gen (5 sq. M) - 130 km?
                        1 m2 PPP (4+ generation) -?
                        -----
                        F-15C / D and F-15E
                        AN / APG-70
                        Year - 80s
                        Antenna Type - SCHAR
                        Instrument range -? Km
                        Istr. 4-gen (5 sq. M) - 185 km
                        1 m2 of faculty (4+ generation) - 124 km
                        -----
                        Retrofit F-15C / D
                        AN / APG-63 (V) 3
                        Year - 2007
                        Antenna Type - AFAR
                        Instrument range -? Km
                        Istr. 4-gen (5 sq. M) - 215 km
                        1 m2 of faculty (4+ generation) - 144 km
                        As you can see, the MiG radar was originally made using the revolutionary technology of the FAR, to which the rest of the world had been growing for decades, and having a little refined it, we got in 1984 one of the most long-range radar in the world. And the F-15 radar is pretty inferior to her.
                        Quote: Ryder
                        The F-18 is a deck-based attack aircraft, the strongest car in its class, but declare. that it’s a super fighter, at least stupid. The deck always has limited performance characteristics in front of the F-15 and F-16

                        Distort again!
                        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-18
                        The aircraft was to be produced in three versions: the F-18A fighter, the A-18A attack aircraft, and the TF-18A combat trainer. The company McDonnell-Douglas managed to combine fighter and assault modifications in one aircraft, which since 1980 was referred to as F / A-18A
                        Well, the last 100% argument:
                        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Авианосцы_типа_«Нимиц»
                        Typical composition of the wing of an American aircraft carrier in 2010:
                        3 F/A-18 McDonnell Hornets 48
                        1 EA-6B Grumman Prowler 4
                        1 E-2C Grumman Hawkeye 4
                        ½ C-2A Grumman Greyhound 2 Transport
                        1 SH-3H Sikorsky Sea King 8
                        Well, and who do you think performs the functions of a fighter-interceptor on a modern American aircraft carrier? F-15, F-16? No! The U.S. Navy believes that the F / A-18 copes with this role!
                      13. Passing
                        +1
                        8 August 2012 01: 41
                        Quote: Ryder
                        Your lie. There is nothing of the kind, the patriots come up with this, attribute this nonsense to the USA, and they themselves begin to argue with it.

                        FACTS ONLY!
                        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_потерь_авиации_Многонациональных_сил_в_ходе_
                        Persian Gulf Wars
                        List of WESTERN SOURCES at the end of the page. Moreover, the list is not complete, the fate of a couple of dozen aircraft is carefully kept secret. I wonder why?
                        Quote: Ryder
                        Your lie. 1967 - a sudden attack. single Israeli aviation losses1973 - attack by Arabs, Israeli aviation suffered heavy losses (a ratio of about 1: 4 in favor of Israel, this is the true price of Soviet military trash) 1991 desert storm, Coalition official losses - 49 aircraft

                        You lie, and constantly. I operate on the facts.
                        Lebanon War 1982
                        Israeli propaganda claims an insanely believable score of 103: 1 in its favor.
                        Gulf War 1991
                        Once again, here is a very specific list
                        http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Список_потерь_авиации_Многонациональных_сил_в_ходе_
                        Persian Gulf Wars
                        FIFTY-FOUR FIFTH FOUR AIRCRAFT LISTED.
                        Here is the total number of aircraft lost for any reason.
                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_war#Air_campaign
                        Iraqi antiaircraft defenses, including MANPADS, were surprisingly ineffective against coalition aircraft and the coalition suffered only 75 aircraft losses

                        FULL FIGURE LOSS - SEVENTY-FIVE AIRCRAFT.
                      14. Passing
                        0
                        8 August 2012 01: 44
                        Once again, I’ll ask you such an uncomfortable question as to why one plane was lost in 1982, and ten years later, when Soviet equipment was outdated by ten years and Western technology improved by ten years, dozens of planes were lost? !!! Or do you want to say that the 1982 Israelis exceeded the 1991 Americans by seventy-five times ??? belay
                        Quote: Ryder
                        a couple of dozen more "unparalleled" MIG-25s were killed in air battles

                        You must be more modest in fantasies, more modest. wink
                        I only know about three shot down by the Israelis in the 80s and four in Iraq in 1991. Note that the plane was invulnerable all seventies, flying over the capital of Israel! This is generally something beyond the limits, there is a war going on, and invulnerable enemy planes brazenly flailing over the capital! And only after decades, they finally learned to shoot him down. WHY TO KNOW THE DEPRECATED, TRIMMED, EXPORT VERSION. Moreover, they are boasting, boasting, but somehow they are silent, and who exactly were finally able to bring down, a fighter or a scout?
          2. 0
            5 August 2012 18: 31
            By the way. About the similarity of the design. This amerovsky animal is more similar to Su-24. Given the mechanization of the wing, and the only keel of the latter - of course ... *)
            1. +3
              5 August 2012 18: 48
              Damn ... *) In general, it looks like ... *)) As for the keel - I wrote something wrong ... *))
              1. +2
                5 August 2012 19: 31
                The last two comments - it was an attempt to make a joke ... *))) a similarity can be found in the Elephant with the Turtle - just ... there would be a desire and official zeal, as explained to Midshipman Tikhon, in the book of Frederick Marriet ... *)
      3. Diesel
        +1
        4 August 2012 16: 33
        I don’t see anything like Mig25 on this plane No.
        1. Rider
          -7
          4 August 2012 16: 50
          Quote: Diesel
          I don’t see anything like Mig25 on this plane

          Very bad, dear. that you don’t notice obvious things.

          MIG specialists always evasively answer this question, because borrowing really took place
          1. +4
            4 August 2012 19: 28
            Borrowed aerodynamic design. The circuit alone does not give anything. Aerodynamics is a science where the whole devil is in the details. Now, if I draw a plane with a direct wing, will you say that I borrowed this from the Wright brothers?
          2. Diesel
            +5
            5 August 2012 11: 49



            IMHO they are not similar, and your vaunted widget cannot carry high-range explosive missiles, cannot fly to PMV, cannot bring down a cruise missile, cannot fly at a speed of 3M, does not have a radar, continue to continue ???? The MiG 25 is an outstanding aircraft, and frankly, nobody needs it .... it makes absolutely no sense to compare it ....
            1. Rider
              -11
              5 August 2012 20: 01
              Quote: Diesel
              your vaunted widget cannot carry high-range explosive missiles, cannot fly to the PMV, cannot bring down a cruise missile, cannot fly at a speed of 3M, does not have a radar, continue to continue?


              Your much-praised MIG-25 was created 10 years later. Continue to continue?

              I will continue for you: MIG-25 did not know what the deck of an aircraft carrier was. The landing of the MIG-25 on the ship - this could not be dreamed by the MIG engineers, even in heavy delirium. The MIG-25 did not have a refueling system in the air, the MIG was created on the basis of Vigillent
              1. staser
                +1
                6 August 2012 01: 12
                The landing of the MIG-25 on the ship - this could not be dreamed by the MIG engineers, even in heavy delirium. MIG-25 did not have a refueling system in the air

                And were such tasks set before the MIG-25?
              2. Passing
                +4
                6 August 2012 01: 17
                Quote: Ryder
                The landing of the MIG-25 on the ship - this could not be dreamed by the MIG engineers, even in heavy delirium.

                MiG engineers had an unusually sound sleep, because they did not even consider the possibility of designing a plane for some mythical Soviet aircraft carriers that had been seen by some in delirious dreams. wink
                Quote: Ryder
                MIG-25 did not have a refueling system in the air

                You do not understand the most basic things, why is he to him? For some reason, you confuse the tasks of American drummers, who are obliged to bring the light of democracy to the most remote corners of the Earth, and the interceptor fighter, which peacefully plows the earth protects a predefined compact area. To do this, he needs a very high speed, powerful radar and ultra-long missiles. He has all this. Dot.
                Quote: Ryder
                MIG was created based on Vigillent

                Besides a fanatical repetition of this mantra, do you have at least some real arguments?
                1. Rider
                  -5
                  6 August 2012 15: 18
                  Quote: Passing by
                  MiG engineers had an unusually sound sleep, because they did not even consider the possibility of designing a plane for some mythical Soviet aircraft carriers

                  This only indicates the technical backwardness of the MIG. Deck Aviation - The Most Complex Technique
                  Quote: Passing by
                  Besides a fanatical repetition of this mantra, do you have at least some real arguments?

                  Yes, Vigillent was created in 1958.
                  MIG engineers were able to reach this level only after 10 years (when work on the F-15 was in full swing in the USA)
                  1. Passing
                    +3
                    6 August 2012 20: 06
                    Quote: Ryder
                    This only indicates the technical backwardness of the MIG. Deck Aviation - The Most Complex Technique

                    Deck aviation is actually a rather sophisticated technique, but a combat aircraft flying at a speed of 3000 km / h is a fantastically outrageous technique, especially in the 60s. The Americans cannot repeat it in 50 years. And the decks we have today are just not riveting, and MiGovtsy and Sukhoi. Even the Chinese mastered without much straining.
                    Quote: Ryder
                    MIG engineers were able to reach this level only after 10 years

                    Twenty five again! Compare A-5 and MiG-25! These are two incompatible cars !!! The only thing that the A-5 revolutionary is an electric remote control. But this is the case when there is a senseless complication, it gave absolutely nothing to the A-5 in combat terms, in contrast to the fourth-generation aircraft with dynamic instability.
                    Quote: Ryder
                    when work on the F-15 was in full swing in the USA

                    In the United States, they worked on the F-15, we have a Su-27. The difference between them is only five years old. Not critical.
                    1. Rider
                      0
                      6 August 2012 22: 36
                      The meaning is as follows:

                      1958, Vigillent appears - a brilliant aircraft for its time. With his main task - the use of A-bombs, he coped perfectly well. Plus a long service as a scout.

                      1969 - the "pride" of the Soviet aviation MIG-25 begins to enter the troops
                      1972 - F-4 15th generation fighter made its first flight.

                      Conclusion: MIG-25 LATE BY AT LEAST 10 YEARS, this overgrowth appeared too late and there was no more sense from it than from a rusty bucket. It could still compete with Viglent - this is its technological level (although even the obviously older A-5 machine has many technical advantages over the MIG-25). There was not enough for a larger MiG-25. In short, the MIG-25 did not appear at the right time, in the United States at the end of the 60s, F-15 vehicles with combat characteristics of a completely different level were developed. As expected, having met in battle a few years later, the Needles smashed into smithereens the latest Soviet technology
                      1. Passing
                        +2
                        7 August 2012 01: 39
                        Quote: Ryder
                        1958, Vigillent appears - a brilliant aircraft for its time. With his main task - the use of A-bombs, he coped perfectly well. Plus a long service as a scout.

                        Og, og, they made a bomber, and they blinded a scout! laughing Brilliantly !!! good .
                      2. Rider
                        -3
                        7 August 2012 15: 14
                        Quote: Passing by
                        Og, og, they made a bomber, and they blinded a scout!

                        The same can be said about the MIG-25. They made an interceptor, but it turned out to be a useless scout
        2. 755962
          +6
          4 August 2012 16: 59
          The main feature of this aircraft was the so-called linear bomb bay, or, as it was also called, a bomb-type cannon bomb bay. It was a pipe passing through the middle and rear of the fuselage, one end of which was tightly closed, and the other came out between the nozzles of the engines and closed with a lid. An expelling powder charge was placed in the tube, followed by a specially developed nuclear weapon. At the right moment, the back cover of the bomb bay was dropped, the expelling charge worked, and the bomb was thrown out of the plane.
          Using this device, which has no analogues in world practice, the designers tried to solve the problem of dropping the combat load regardless of the speed and spatial position of the aircraft.
        3. laurbalaur
          0
          5 August 2012 19: 09
          Once upon a time in the city of №, I talked with a specialist from the MIG Design Bureau, and so - he confirmed that the MIG-25 concept was taken from the A-5 and, guys, why paraffin the enemy’s equipment if it’s good? !
          1. +1
            6 August 2012 20: 46
            Concept?! I worked on a MiG and I know that a general aerodynamic scheme was taken from the A-5 according to the principle: "Hey, Vasya, the American has a cool OT arrangement. Maybe we should try this too?"
      4. +2
        5 August 2012 16: 49
        Quote: Ryder
        . and all. Nothing more this plane unimpressive
        - after the not-so-successful and only military clash between conscientious pilots and the Israelis, the Soviets were eager to take revenge. But the Soviet leadership decided not to lose pilots and planes, but to fulfill the task of pacifying unbridled Israel by simply demonstrating the MiG-25. This plane flew in and began to demonstrate aerobatics in the sky of Israel, and the vaunted Israeli phantoms could not reach even half that height. Gold Meir can only bite the bullet in impotent rage and go to the conditions of the Soviet Union. Learn materiel and history, expert. If you think that ensuring victory without a single shot with this aircraft is a zero achievement and an unremarkable property of this aircraft, then this only characterizes you as a wretched and one-sided debater, nothing more.
        1. Rider
          +1
          5 August 2012 20: 04
          Quote: aksakal
          the task of pacifying unbridled Israel

          laughing Murzilka Magazine and Pioneer Dawn
          Quote: aksakal
          Gold Meir can only bite the bullet in impotent rage and go to the conditions of the Soviet Union.

          Israel in impotent rage defeated Syria and Egypt, pumped up by the latest Soviet trash
          1. DIMS
            0
            5 August 2012 20: 07
            And what was "new" there?
          2. +1
            5 August 2012 20: 20
            Nuuuu ... Rider... *))

            Already the USSR, and my Father, and my countless Daddies, from all over the Union, who advised in the Arab countries, agree not to blame that Israel knows how to "settle well" ... *)) Guys, Jews, acted very cleverly, settling exactly in the middle of those countries that can turn any victory into defeat - over and over again, modern history shows that the Arabs are not warriors, but, damn it, born hucksters, unfortunately ... *) Israel, has also attached a strong political instinct to bargaining, plus the lobby - nothing more ... *)

            It’s something like that ... *) I look with curiosity at what is happening in the Middle East, honestly, sincerely hope, for example, that Syria will survive. But there is little hope. Probably the entire military ardor of the Arabs ended with the demise of the frantic Kurd - Salah At Dina. And he didn’t wake up anymore ... *) huh ...
        2. DIMS
          +3
          5 August 2012 20: 20
          Everything was a little wrong there. MiG-25 aircraft of 63 of the Separate Aviation Intelligence Unit flew over the territory of Israel with impunity, conducting aerial photography. Two dozen fighters rose to intercept the first, but there was no sense. Then they were just nervous, but they didn’t try to intercept anymore.
          Brezhnev refused the request to strike with these airplanes on Israeli territory, saying that the USSR is not at war with its civilian population. Moreover, a 40-km exclusion zone over Tel Aviv was introduced.
          1. Rider
            0
            6 August 2012 15: 14
            Quote: DIMS
            Brezhnev refused the request to strike with these airplanes on Israeli territory, saying that the USSR is not at war with its civilian population. Moreover, a 40-km exclusion zone over Tel Aviv was introduced.


            Does anyone believe that the MIG-25 could change anything in that war?
            One bomb on Tel Aviv - and in a day the Israel Defense Forces would storm Damascus.
      5. 0
        6 August 2012 15: 15
        "Created 10 years earlier"
        Dear, you are pulling facts out of the general context ... "In the late 1950s, the development of a military aircraft was deployed in the USSR, which would be able to reflect the alleged threat from the American supersonic bomber Convair B-58" Hustler "and its modernized followers, and also the promising XB-70 Valkyrie and the Lockheed SR-71 reconnaissance aircraft, which in the future were capable of developing three times the speed of sound. " as it was needed and done ... And the concept ... maybe borrowed ... but from the concept to the plane is very far ...

        "The flight speed of the original combatant interceptor MiG-25P at full afterburner of the R-15 engines corresponds to 3 km / h with full rocket armament - 000 R-4 missiles, which create high drag and weigh about 40 tons. 2% higher airspeed. This has been confirmed American specialistswho have carried out an engine race and found that the aircraft can exceed Mach 3.2 (3 400 km / h). The MiG-25r scouts fly even faster than interceptors. However, in operation, the speed is limited to 3 km / h (000 m). The MiG-2.83, if necessary, could fly faster than any aircraft in the world. But in real operation the sr-25 flew at a higher speed of 71 - 3000 km / h "
        1. Rider
          -1
          6 August 2012 15: 38
          Quote: viruskvartirus
          This was confirmed by American experts who carried out an engine race and found that the aircraft could exceed Mach 3.2 (3 km / h). The MiG-400r scouts fly even faster than interceptors. However, in operation, the speed is limited to 25 km / h (3 m). The MiG-000, if necessary, could fly faster than any aircraft in the world. But in real operation the sr-2.83 flew at a higher speed of 25 - 71 km / h "

          Limit for MIG-25: could fly with a speed of 2,8M for no more than 8 minutes
          SR-71: could fly at a speed of 3,2M for three hours

          Still, the technical lagged behind.
          1. +1
            6 August 2012 18: 09
            do not be stupid in what they are us in what we them, remember the first flight, space stations ... and the fact that 2 of 5 shuttles were covered, and Buran flew and landed without pilots ... and the SR-71 is a reconnaissance aircraft and not an interceptor the combatant God himself commanded him to dump faster, which you understand is reflected in the cost of SR-71 built 32 of them 12 were covered with a copper basin as a result of accidents) MIG-25 built 1190 and here's another) "In four issues of the magazine 'Aviation and Cosmonautics '(# 8-# 12, 2000) an article was published (' Clarence Johnson's Black Bird ') about the history of the creation of the strategic reconnaissance aircraft SR-71 (A-12 / YF-12). It is curious that the author of the article, noting that' aircraft of the series A-12 / YF-12 / SR-71 have become outstanding achievements of the world aircraft industry ', nevertheless, he prefers the MiG-25 aircraft, because Soviet aircraft designers managed to do what the Americans failed to do.It was possible to create, on the basis of a single basic design, both a high-speed high-speed reconnaissance aircraft, and an interceptor fighter, and a fighter-bomber, in addition, the cost of aircraft and the cost of operating them SR-71 and MiG-25 are incommensurable. SR-71 even the Americans could not afford, the US Air Force refused to fund this project and the entire program was carried out only thanks to the support of the CIA. Therefore, the author quite appropriately considers the A-12 / YF-12 / SR-71 program to be an 'outstanding failure'. "
            1. Rider
              0
              6 August 2012 22: 38
              Quote: viruskvartirus
              Mig-25 built 1190 and here's another)


              when the MIG-25 was built in the USSR, the F-15 made its first flight in the USA
              In battle, "Eagle" smashed the Soviet MIG-23 and MIG-25 like a tuzik, although they were created at the same time

              Cause? MIG-25 was lateIt was already obsolete during the design period
              1. 0
                7 August 2012 09: 47
                The first flight of the MiG-25 on March 6, 1964 is also not entirely true and ... "There is an opinion that the hijacked aircraft fell into the hands of American aircraft designers, who studied the aircraft and, based on the data obtained, constructed the American F-15. However, this opinion is refuted by the fact that The F-15 was put into service in the same 1976 year (on November 14, 1974, the first serial F-15B was transferred to the USAF), and made its first flight in 1972.
                Regarding how the Tusik heating pad, the first meeting was an Israeli ambush ...
                "When the MiG-25 approached, the Israeli F-15, covered by a cloud of dipole reflectors, emerged from an ambush with a climb. Being in the lower hemisphere, it remained invisible to the MiG-25 pilot; guidance services could not warn the pilot due to the active jamming of radio control channels At the oncoming rendezvous in a set of F-15s from a distance of 25 km, he fired a missile and shot down a MiG-25. "
                The second is ambushed by the Syrians ... and they shot down one F-15, and the second ...
                A pair of Israeli F-15, opening their heights, began the pursuit of the Syrian MiG-21. Two MiG-25PDs came to intercept the Eagles, with one of the MiGs attacking in the opposite direction, and the second from the flank. The pilot of the first interceptor, due to the failure of automatic tracking, was unable to launch missiles and was shot down by the Sparrow missile launcher launched by the leading pair of F-15.
                The result of those battles of 3: 1 ... in detail here http://www.airwar.ru/history/locwar/bv/mig25isr/mig25isr.html
                This is how the first counter-missile attack in the history of air wars took place. According to the records, it was provided by scouts who undertook a planned demonstrative maneuver and dropped passive interference, as well as a specialized electronic warfare aircraft that was on duty over the sea together with the All-Union Communist Party Hokai ╩ and created noise interference that disrupted the control of the MiG-25. " so much effort just to shoot down, MiG-25 gloriously drank blood over Israel ...
                1. 0
                  7 August 2012 10: 50
                  viruskvartirus,
                  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFBBM7EwU1E начните смотреть с 32 минуты, там как раз о первой встрече ф15 и мигов,там как раз таки ракетами и не сбили,миги.не помню кажется в этом же ролике про угнанный миг 25,израильтяне провели более 100 учебных боев прежде чем ввязались в прямое столкновение.Учится учится как завещал..... ещё ни кто не отменял.
                2. Rider
                  0
                  7 August 2012 15: 49
                  Quote: viruskvartirus
                  The second is ambushed by the Syrians ... and they shot down one F-15, and the second ...


                  The Syrian side could not provide a single fragment of the F-15
                  Although all the wreckage of the downed Phantoms - showed regularly
              2. +3
                7 August 2012 10: 30
                I strongly advise you to read about the creation of the MiG-25. There were very interesting projects (both with D-36 dual-circuit engines and refueling in the air and Radar Barrier).

                Sorry for the image quality. I haven’t found it yet.
                1. Rider
                  -2
                  7 August 2012 15: 13
                  Quote: Zerstorer
                  There were very interesting projects (both with D-36 dual-circuit engines and refueling in the air and Radar Barrier).


                  That's why we have a lot of drawings, and the Americans have an SR-71 and a world speed record
                  And Vigillent. ahead of its time
                  1. Eugene
                    0
                    7 August 2012 23: 20
                    I also love the "black bird", but I can't help but pay attention to a couple of facts.

                    1) 3.5M - you bent, or did not indicate which ones M. And then - bent.

                    2) Record by record, but have you ever wondered whose record they broke and how much?)

                    About design flaws and why is he so strange looking in the know?
                2. 0
                  7 August 2012 16: 03
                  O.S. Samoilovich "Near Sykhim"
                  Chapter 5
                  Attack aircraft turning into a front bomber :)
          2. +2
            7 August 2012 10: 09
            Well, do not compare the car with the bus. The MiG-25 is a combat machine, and the SR-71 is a special-purpose aircraft. For comparison: the flight of the SR-71 is a whole special operation (3 refueling planes must be involved, a plane must be prepared in a few days). By the way, there is one interesting point about the operation of the SR-71: it took off with half-empty tanks, accelerated to supersonic, warmed up (to eliminate the compensation gaps in the tanks), then followed by braking and the first refueling, and only then to the combat course ... How are you Think we could afford such a circus?
            1. Rider
              -2
              7 August 2012 15: 11
              Quote: Zerstorer
              Do you think we could afford such a circus?

              This is not a circus, this is a world record

              Quote: Zerstorer
              For comparison: the flight of the SR-71 is a whole special operation (3 refueling planes must be involved, a plane must be prepared in a few days).

              1000 sorties over Vietnam - not bad for an experimental record car

              Quote: Zerstorer
              MiG-25 drill machine

              Therefore, comparing it to the SR-71 is useless. He is inferior to the "Blackbird" in performance characteristics. Just 8 minutes supersonic
              1. 0
                7 August 2012 16: 19
                Quote: Ryder
                Therefore, it is useless to compare it with the SR-71

                Well done! I explain this to you that it is not correct to compare them.

                Quote: Ryder
                This is not a circus, this is a world record

                The SR-71 was not conceived for a record. When I was writing my diploma on the topic "Fighter-interceptor" (M = 3,5 without time limit, takeoff weight 75 t smile ) I read very carefully everything that was known on the SR-71 and MiG-25 and what problems they had.

                A little remark.
                Quote: Ryder
                Only 8 minutes in super sound

                8 min at M = 2.83. The MiG-25 performed its tasks superbly. The fact that some tried to use it as an air superiority plane is on their conscience and they themselves paid for it. If you "don't like" the MiG-25, say so. The taste and color of the markers are different smile
              2. -1
                7 August 2012 22: 49
                Quote: Ryder
                Only 8 minutes in super sound

                That is: the MiG-25 was a transonic aircraft, which could exceed the speed of sound, but only by 8 minutes? and probably only in a dive?
              3. Eugene
                0
                7 August 2012 23: 14
                Why didn't the SR-71 fly over Kazakhstan like the U-2? But only over Vietnam with its S-75?
          3. 0
            7 August 2012 10: 13
            And also "having carried out a deep modernization of the MIG airframe itself. Many duralumin parts of the outer skin were replaced with titanium, and where there was titanium, it became niobium. Due to the enormous cost, this machine, which existed in a single copy, was jokingly called the" zarptitsa ". We chose the training, two-pilot, version of the MIG. The first seat was vacated for the tested navigation system, and the pilot was sitting in the back seat - he corrected, and by that time programmed, the electronics according to the principle of "analogue of my actions", well, he landed the plane if the automatics To give additional power moment and achieve the required speed, they came up with a simple, but very effective method of "acceleration on paws" - instead of rockets and outboard fuel tanks, solid-fuel boosters were suspended under the wings. their "paws" until the fuel is completely depleted. According to rumors, this aircraft-rocket hybrid overlapped the SR-71 both in speed and ceiling y climbing on 4's Mach (sound speeds) far beyond 30 km, where aerodynamic flight itself is extremely problematic - there is little air. True, the active flight time was very short - about twenty to thirty minutes, but more was not required for the task. It goes without saying that in order to save time and money, they only modernized that it was impossible not to change. The aircraft was not intended for long-term operation, and many nodes were ruthlessly thrown out to facilitate take-off mass, which inevitably affected the overall reliability of the machine.

            And then one day, for reasons unknown to me, an emergency happened at the peak of altitude and speed - the hood was dropped, as when a pilot was ejected. At the same time, the seat itself with the pilot did not "shoot back". The flyers of such machines are always in special stratospheric suits that can compensate for depressurization, but not in the position of a motorcyclist at speeds four times the speed of sound. Let's remember school physics again - the resistance of the environment increases in proportion to the square of the increase in speed. That is, if an ordinary fighter pilot with a huge risk to life catapults at two speeds of sound (and this is already faster than the speed of a sniper bullet) - the air stream breaks bones and tears the super-strong material of the suit and the upholstery of the chair to shreds. In this case, the resistance of the medium was four times higher. At a speed of 4M, friction against the air even makes metal hot, and even plastic-synthetics ... A fourfold safety factor is not provided not only for light spacesuits, but also for heavy equipment.

            The uniqueness of the situation lies in the fact that the pilot was alive in the first seconds after the accident, apparently his helmet "leaked" later. Seeing the hopelessness of the situation, after the squib under the seat did not work, he, by some miracle and absolutely inhuman effort, managed to switch the plane to the "Buranov" autopilot. Ten minutes later, the automatics safely landed the car on the runway of the military airfield "Goreloe".

            A special group immediately arrived at the plane. There were no portable video cameras then, and documentary filming was carried out on antediluvian film and photographic film. What we later saw on the screen was impressive. The sides of the pilot's seat caught in the direct airflow seemed to have been cut off with a circular saw. The strong corrugated hoses with metal rings for supplying the air-oxygen mixture in the helmet were chipped off, as if some vandal had been processing them with a rough file for quite some time. All the plastic parts of the cockpit are terribly melted, and the remains of the steering wheel seem to have been walked through with a sandblaster or a hacksaw. The side surfaces of the pressure helmet were also melted, and the plastic visor looked as if it had been thoroughly burned with a blowtorch. The aluminum parts of the suit seemed to have fallen under the autogenous gas cutter, the metal was melted, and in some places it evaporated, leaving only a thin oxide layer. It's a miracle that the plane itself didn't burn. Still, the 25th "Migar" is an ingenious design for its time!

            The pilot died instantly ....
            The cause of death was described simply - a ruptured brain and hypobaric boiling of all biological fluids. "Perhaps the baida bought something for that sold .. but.
            1. 0
              7 August 2012 10: 27
              Baida however ...
            2. Rider
              0
              7 August 2012 15: 08
              Quote: viruskvartirus
              And also "having carried out a deep modernization of the MIG airframe itself. Many duralumin parts of the outer skin were changed to titanium, and where there was titanium, it became niobium. Due to the enormous cost, this machine, which existed in a single copy, was jokingly called" zarpitsa "


              This is a famous internet bike called "Fried Pilot"

  3. laurbalaur
    +5
    4 August 2012 10: 31
    Handsome plane! Like many in the Navy.
  4. +3
    4 August 2012 10: 45
    Our passenger Tu-144 also had supersonic cruising speed, and the RD-144-36A engine standing on the Tu-51D was the first gas turbine engine in the world designed for long-term supersonic flight without using an afterburner.
    1. 0
      4 August 2012 19: 39
      Usually, "Cruising" refers to the flight mode in which the longest flight range is provided. Sometimes this is replaced by the following: "the longest flight mode of the aircraft in order to reach a given point in space (when flying at a given range). In this mode, the ratio of the required thrust to the flight speed is usually minimal."
  5. +3
    4 August 2012 10: 47
    The division into generations is conditional. As a rule, the transition to a new generation of aviation complexes indicates the emergence of new properties of the complex or the transition of "old" properties to a higher level. And all these properties should be incorporated into the AK concept. For example, we can give many examples of the presence of various properties in aircraft (for example, the F-106 has an internal weapons compartment, a small EPR, a supersonic "cruise flight" * this is also a slyness since flight at high altitudes cannot be carried out at subsonic *)
    1. +3
      4 August 2012 10: 57
      Quote: Zerstorer
      supersonic "cruising flight" * is also slyness because flight at high altitudes cannot be carried out on a sound basis


      True? But what about the U-2 Dragon Lady? Gotta ask Mr. Powers
      1. +1
        4 August 2012 13: 39
        I meant for the F-106, and not for the U-2 jet powered glider.
  6. Rockets
    -3
    4 August 2012 11: 34
    The author of the sensation did not work, does not pull, neither 5 nor even 4+
    Product of its time
  7. +1
    4 August 2012 18: 56
    Pay attention to the cost of this miracle plane ...
  8. sapulid
    +10
    5 August 2012 01: 42
    Guys, what's the argument about? That old opponents had good planes? Somewhere, they got the upper hand, somewhere, we. We have not surpassed their "Blackbird", although we were able to create a rival in the person of MIG31. Somewhere they ripped from us, somewhere, we. Compression suit, whose invention? Jamming? They created a lot of things, and we copied them. They ripped from us no less. How else? It was a deadly confrontation between systems! In general, the author is right. Old developments, sometimes, surpassed their time and their design solutions are used in modern aircraft construction, and not only ...
  9. Ivanair
    +1
    5 August 2012 17: 06
    Ironically, ironically, but the plane was good. Only it was too "sharpened" for A-bombs, and the development of a more universal modification was not carried out. But it could have turned out to be a serious competitor to the same F-111.
    By the way, the British also did a similar project - BAC TSR.2, but not for aircraft carriers. I always liked the design of these two cars Yes
  10. maxiv1979
    0
    6 August 2012 08: 07
    Yes, what a dispute, the amers themselves did not know where to adapt this flying miracle) they poked around with him and rolled out to the dump, except for some records, he did not prove himself to be anything
    1. Rider
      0
      6 August 2012 15: 32
      Quote: maxiv1979
      except for some records, he did not prove himself by anything

      Like our Su-27 and MIG-29
      1. Eugene
        0
        7 August 2012 23: 21
        In Eritria, they managed to crush each other.
  11. DUTCH
    0
    6 August 2012 11: 39
    Great article! I first read about this plane. A good car.
  12. maxiv1979
    0
    7 August 2012 05: 16
    Quote: Ryder
    Like our Su-27 and MIG-29


    The aforementioned aircraft are strong servants purchased by many countries, produced by many hundreds and more than once compared with foreign technology, their descendants live and feel great in the world market. With this approach, we can say that the last aircraft that showed itself was IL-2 or V-17
    1. Eugene
      0
      7 August 2012 23: 22
      In fairness, for the sake of 15 and 16, they are much more battle-hardened. But you don’t understand the equipment.
  13. taurus69
    0
    7 August 2012 11: 16
    Hydegg, pgo what "our planes" are you talking about? what is there stuck together in Yevgeistan? c. "mirage" that was burned out by the frog pads? do not tell my gray balls!
    to the rest: to teach THIS culture is extremely useless, it does not study, it stupidly repeats various recorded tracks (with the possibility of minor changes).
  14. 0
    2 September 2012 14: 07
    Yeah. Ryder tightly annoyed everyone, What do we have today. It is true that we have what we have. What’s good, that they don’t climb us much, they’re afraid, it calms us somewhat. Our MiGs are still flying, and they have these planes in a landfill, our designers have laid such a reserve of capabilities in the airframe that they are still used today. So judge for yourself. In other countries, there are none !!! fellow
  15. 0
    6 June 2018 20: 52
    Quote: AlexxxNik
    The union was not weak by nature

    Yes Yes.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"