PDA

View Full Version : SR71 vs J-37 Viggen. Very intresting story



BaronUnderpants
12-19-2005, 05:25 PM
From an article in a swedish defence magazine.

The article presents an interview with the former Viggen division leader, Per-Olof Eldh. The article is about near encounters with the SR-71 Blackbird near swedish airspace. He recalls one time as they where practicing airdefense over Gotland (an island outside the eastcoast of Sweden) but suddenly where interupted by the command central to intercept a target moving towards them, coming from the near costal area south of Stockholm. Per-Olof was guided to an direct attack at a target flying at 21500 meters (about 65 000 feet). His radar locked on at maximum distance,and the primary weapon selected was the Rb 71 Skyflash, and by the numbers presented to him he knew that it could only be a Mig 25 or the SR-71. As the contact came closer he could eventually see the gray siluette of an SR-71 passing a couple of 1000 meters above. Per-Olofs altitude is claimed to still be classified. But he says that he was higher then he had ever been before, and the sky turned black instead of the usual blueish colour. Since that day they had several contacts with the SR-71. They often flew very close to swedish airspace. coming from the east just south of ├...land at mach 3, decreasing speed to mach 2.56 to make the turn and head south along the swedish coast, accelerating between the islands Gotland and Íland. Per-olof says that he made 5 encounters during his time as an active pilot.

The usual way to make an intercept was to climb up to 8000 meter, turn around and head north back towards Stockholm, accelerating to maximum speed and altitude. The later evaluations told them that they would have succeded in shooting down the aircraft if they had used their missiles.

MB_Avro_UK
12-19-2005, 05:38 PM
Interesting account...I thought that the Blackbird was too high and fast to be intercepted??? Or am I wrong??

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

berg417448
12-19-2005, 05:47 PM
Since it was "only" at 65,000 feet I'd say it is quite possible. Had it been flying at 80,000 feet (acknowledged operational ceiling) it likely would not have been possible.

MLudner
12-19-2005, 05:55 PM
I'm not absolutely certain, but the SR-71 is faster than any air intercept missile so the SR-71 pilot probably would have just punched it. They probably were not too worried about getting attacked by the Swedish AF, though, which is why they were probably flying low at that point in the run.

BaronUnderpants
12-19-2005, 06:16 PM
In the 80- the J-37 Viggen was equiped with RB-71 Skyflash with a speed of mach 4+. But in practice it still means a headon shot is the only way. In teory a shot from the JA-37 could hit if it came from the front and below SR-71.

RB71 has a range of 45 km ( 30 miles ) and with the speed differance it has to be closer than 8500 meters ( 26 000 feet ) to hit the target before it runs out of fuel. The official numbers state that the operational service ceeling differs with about 10 000 meters ( 30 000 feet ) between the JA-27 and SR71.

So if the SR-71 flew at top maxuimum altitude it wouldnt work.

Mind u, the true maximum service altitude for the JA-37 is still classefied as i understand it. dont know about the SR71 though.

jarink
12-19-2005, 09:57 PM
Not only would it have to be a headon shot it would have to be a perfectly aimed shot. At a Mach 7+ closing speed, any maneuvering necessary by the missle would either exceed it's G rating or it would turn wide. I've read up on the Blackbird (some of the info classified) and it was an amazing machine.

What it comes down to is about the only planes that had a chance to down it would be the Mig-25 or the A-12 (interceptor version of the SR-71). Even then, an AAM with a nuke would have been the only sure way to knock one down. SAMs had/have NO chance. Angles, speed and altitude made this bird virtually untouchable. When they slowed after making speed runs over "denied" territory, they would be easier to bring down, just like shooting Me-262s in the landing pattern!

Gibbage1
12-19-2005, 10:24 PM
Ya. I agree that the J-37 caught the SR-71 at a vulnerable time. If the J-37 was flying over enemy teritory when it met the SR-71, it would of been nothing more then a flash on theradar screen. The SR-71 could fly a LOT faster and higher then it met it.

GAU-8
12-19-2005, 10:42 PM
I remember reading on various accounts, and also watching on several documentaries a basic statement along roughly these lines..

"IF" we were ever shot at..we "probably" were too far, fast, and high in the envelope for the enemies defences to target,range,fire, at the threat they were locked onto...was allready gone...not that I ever had this encounter"

the fact that one never came down in enemy territory like a certain U-2... im pretty sure they know what they were talkin about. "if"it ever happened... hmmmmm

alert_1
12-20-2005, 01:38 AM
Max. speed of SR71 is stil classified, rumours said "about" 4300 km/h (max. operational, max. emergency is probably even higher). This speed wa never officialy recorded, so who knows never tell...max. officila operational alttitude=24400m, "unoffical"= >30000m, only F15A was able to intercept SR71 during "balistic" intercept using AIM7F Sparrow, but it was more experiment then useful tactic..

robban75
12-20-2005, 03:32 AM
Another interesting encounter involving the Viggen was when an SR-71 had an engine problem and was forced to drop to lower altitudes. A pair of Fighterviggens intercepted the SR-71 and escorted it into NATO airspace. In the air at the same time were MiG's and Suchoi's wanting to take a closer look, but the Viggens kept them away. Apparently, the Blackbird pilot was very relieved when he saw the swedish Viggens. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

The Draken has also successfully intercepted Blackbirds over the Baltic sea. The Drakens radar wasn't as powerful as that the Viggens, nor did it carry the Skyflash missile, but it was built to be an interceptor. And it probably did a better job at this than the Viggen.

Grendel-B
12-20-2005, 03:54 AM
The Blackbird's have been intercepted more often than that. Flying high and fast only makes it harder, not impossible. The Russians flew regular interception attempts with MiG-25s and MiG-31s against Blackbirds over the Baltic Sea and ... in the Murmansk/Norway area, can't remember what the sea is called in English.

Anyway, as their experiences tell, intercepting it was hard but possible. One MiG-31 pilot recalled one of his Blackbird intercepts in the Norway/Murmansk area very nicely. He had positioned himself below the SR-71, flying in high Mach speed, and could see the plane above him when he watched directly overhead. If needed, he could have pulled nose over, activated radar and launched the missile.

As I understood it, they didn't necessarily activate radars and try for missile lock, as that would have alerted their target about them. So I'd dare to guess that the SR-71s have been intercepted many more times than their crews tend to believe, they just haven't noticed it as the interceptor didn't use their radar.

neural_dream
12-20-2005, 04:00 AM
Amazing bird this SR71. Too bad we can't see it flying in airshows http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif. As for it being interceptable, first there are several pilot accounts saying so, and, well, if it weren't it would still be used today http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif, incorporating the modern technological improvements of course.

Waldo.Pepper
12-20-2005, 04:13 AM
In Deep Black...this book..

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/9993854247/qid=1135077...ks&v=glance&n=283155 (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/9993854247/qid=1135077161/sr=1-26/ref=sr_1_26/002-0805061-2988852?s=books&v=glance&n=283155)

It is said that the ceiling of the SR-71 is "well over 100000 feet".

Viper2005_
12-20-2005, 05:37 AM
Wanna know what the SR-71 can do? RTFM http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/manual/5/5-9.gif

http://www.sr-71.org/blackbird/

alert_1
12-20-2005, 05:59 AM
If SR71 crews WANT to be intercepted (to test reaction times, prepareness and performance of potential adversary) then well, it happened http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif but if they DONT, they would never went so close to any fighter, be sure. It all was part of "teasing and palying game" operations.

skabbe
12-20-2005, 07:35 AM
cool!

Anyone knows the SR71 top speed at groundlevel? I know that Viggen were extremly fast at low hights

Slickun
12-20-2005, 09:07 AM
My Dad ran practice intercepts on SR-71's at 80,000 feet, in an F-101B.

US interceptors, with nuclear tipped missiles, had a chance to get a hit, if things were done just right.

One problem was you couldn't lock onto it, using the F-101B's radar, until it was 15 miles away. At mach 4+ closure, you had seconds to pull up, zoom, and get a snap shot. With luck, it could have happened.

LEXX_Luthor
12-20-2005, 09:51 AM
From what I understand, fast head on closing speeds like in this thread required fission warheads to make up for lack of fuze accuracy.

nice pics... online BlackBird museum ~> http://www.habu.org/

J-58 (long read) ~~>> http://aerostories.free.fr/technique/J58/J58_01/page8.html

p1ngu666
12-20-2005, 10:11 AM
ive always wondered if the russians had a similer plane, or just used satalites.
or just respected others airspace more..

berg417448
12-20-2005, 10:28 AM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
ive always wondered if the russians had a similer plane, or just used satalites.
or just respected others airspace more..

Mig-25R. It has been used for overflights of several other countries..Iran and Israel for sure.
And they were known to use an Aeroflot airliner or two for the recon purpose. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Waldo.Pepper
12-20-2005, 12:48 PM
And they were known to use an Aeroflot airliner or two for the recon purpose


The 'West' used Airliners with regular people like you and me as passengers on them as well.

LEXX_Luthor
12-20-2005, 01:21 PM
pingu::
ive always wondered if the russians had a similer plane, or just used satalites.
or just respected others airspace more..
Yes! Soviet long range penetration aircraft (say, Tu-95) were not as competitive with US air defences as US penetration aircraft were with Soviet air defences. USSR learned Respect for US air defence, but was unable to teach Respect to the US and so US was far more aggressive including launching thousands of balloons which on occasion caused air accidents in Soviet space (balloons and gondola painted blue for low visibility). Balloons were very hard to shoot down, often deflating slowly from standard gun/missile weapons.

US long range aircraft (say, B-47) were a match for early Soviet air defenses, both in terms of speed and altitude, but more importantly, the raw size and totally undeveloped nature of the areas the financially poorer USSR needed to defend was the major factor weakening Soviet air defence deployments which include airfields, radar controllers, and later, SAM sites. Traditionally, no nation faced threats from the North Pole until the Cold War and this diluted Soviet defence efforts. Many US spy planes were shot down in Cold War, but I don't know of any Soviet spy planes shot down by US air defence. If so, this would be because US was far more aggressive in flying over Soviet Union.

This topic, btw, is my primary interest in combat flight sims, and have to make it myself using StrikeFighters simulation with 3-rd Party aircraft mods but its brutal since that sim is created for tactical ops (aren't they all?)


Berg::
Mig-25R. It has been used for overflights of several other countries..Iran and Israel for sure.
When USSR can do it without being intercepted, they were as aggressive in spy flights as anybody. Its the same old Spit vs Ju-86P and MiG-3U vs Ju-86P story, when you can get away with it you do, when you can't you don't.

LEXX_Luthor
12-20-2005, 01:37 PM
Good read...

-25 vs -71 article ~>> http://www.wvi.com/~sr71webmaster/mig25.html

Estocade85
12-20-2005, 01:56 PM
Nice articles guys!
Would the Lightning be able to cath one, since it pwned a Concorde etc...?

berg417448
12-20-2005, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And they were known to use an Aeroflot airliner or two for the recon purpose


The 'West' used Airliners with regular people like you and me as passengers on them as well. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course...just pointing out that there is more than one way to overfly and recon a country.

berg417448
12-20-2005, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by Estocade85:
Nice articles guys!
Would the Lightning be able to cath one, since it pwned a Concorde etc...?

Catch one? NO. SR-71 is much faster than the Concorde. Intercept one? Possibly. Although I do believe it would need better missiles than the Lightning usually carried.

airdale1960
12-20-2005, 04:01 PM
I was stationed in the Aleutian Islands for 12 months during the cold war, there were more Bear intercepts than I care to mention. Yes, the Soviets intruded into US airspace. The US had hog nose EC-135s doing surveilance runs along Soviet airspace. It was all a big game.

LEXX_Luthor
12-20-2005, 04:36 PM
Thanks airdale.

It may have been more than just "a game" as Mantrid in season 2 LEXX would say, since the information was used to target nuclear strikes as well as gather critical data on air defence radars and communications in the vast unknown regions of the Urals and beyond, information that was never known until the spy flights and would be essential in any mass nuclear strike.

Did Soviet spy planes overfly Groom Lake or overfly the SAC bomber bases in the United States? I don't think so -- the wealthy continental US was too developed allowing good defence but I don't really know. Did any Soviet spy planes get shot down over US territory? If it happened, we never hear about this. A few times US planes overflew the most sensitive Soviet bases, and of course, were often shot down even when on peripheral missions.

airdale1960
12-20-2005, 07:44 PM
I can only speak as a pawn in a larger game. I was expendable, once we warned NORAD of a launch, our lives were not worth a plug nickle. Game over for us! There was talk that the Sky Cops (Air Police, Security Police)were ordered to kill us in case of invasion.

airdale1960
12-20-2005, 08:03 PM
Remember KAL 007, in 1983. The game became deadly for 269 inocents. The USSR took the brunt of the blame, the US should've bore more responsibility.

LEXX_Luthor
12-20-2005, 08:56 PM
Thanks airdale. What did ya'll do up there?

p1ngu666
12-20-2005, 10:05 PM
i remmber seeing footage on tv of kurstov? the one after stalin, in the un, with bits of U2 spyplane on his desk, asking what the americans where doing i think http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

berg417448
12-20-2005, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
i remmber seeing footage on tv of kurstov? the one after stalin, in the un, with bits of U2 spyplane on his desk, asking what the americans where doing i think http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif


Many people do not realize that British high altitude flights of the Meteor PR 19 continued over Russia for months after that U-2 was downed. The Meteors could fly 5,000 feet higher than the U-2 and the Russians could not reach them.

Daiichidoku
12-20-2005, 11:10 PM
there were several recce flights made over USSR by B 45 Tornado bombers, crewed by RAF personnel in late 40s

AFAIK, there were also many ELINT flights made along, or just inside of soviet airspace by various prop types shortly after the war
one of them, a USN B 24 Privateer ELINT craft was shot down by migs 15s

R988z
12-21-2005, 07:11 AM
Soviets shot down loads of US aircraft during the cold war, a list can be found here.
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_301.shtml

US has taken out a few as well
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_302.shtml

Even the Europeans have downed some over the years.
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_303.shtml

Also there is a somewhat well known story of the RB-47 that was almost shotdown by MiG-17s, an account by the pilot can be read here, along with some other stuff he did such as flying an RB-47 under a bridge! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif
http://www.b-47.com/Stories/lappo/lappo.html

LEXX_Luthor
12-21-2005, 08:01 AM
R988z::
US has taken out a few as well
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_302.shtml

Interesting. No shoot downs of long range recce aircraft violating US airspace -- I am thinking the Soviets were not aggressive enough in the face of US defences to overfly the more sensitive areas (Wright Field for example) which would call for shootdowns.

Closest thing would be the NAVY F-4 collision with Tu-16.

berg417448
12-21-2005, 08:11 AM
Lexx don't forget that UN headquarters is in New York. No need to fly your planes to get a lot of information. Just have your "diplomats" or their staff get in a car and drive!

LEXX_Luthor
12-21-2005, 12:58 PM
True, no need to explore USA with long range strategic aircraft when a classic F-100 long bed would do just dandy.

sinzov
12-21-2005, 01:17 PM
SR-71 - the invincible dream come true ?

propably the single most disputed question in the community :-)

during the late 70ies and the 80ies SR-71 used to fly along the Soviet Baltic coastline. Almost every time the Blackbird was to leave the Baltic a lone MiG-25 took off in the GDR and positioned itself 3 km behind and below the U.S.-spyplane. Swedish (radar-)onlookers "were impressed by this precision". doing some calculations this would give the SR-71 crew some 15 seconds to leave their airplane before being hit by 70 kg of R-40 high explosives.

the MiG-31 was as fast as the -25 and featured the most advanced weapon-system of it's era. any doubts ?

the USSR certainly did not waste millions of roubles for just a glimpse at a radar blip.

cheers
sinzov

alert_1
12-21-2005, 01:28 PM
Posted 21 Dec 2005 21:17
SR-71 - the invincible dream come true ?

propably the single most disputed question in the community :-)

during the late 70ies and the 80ies SR-71 used to fly along the Soviet Baltic coastline. Almost every time the Blackbird was to leave the Baltic a lone MiG-25 took off in the GDR and positioned itself 3 km behind and below the U.S.-spyplane. Swedish (radar-)onlookers "were impressed by this precision". doing some calculations this would give the SR-71 crew some 15 seconds to leave their airplane before being hit by 70 kg of R-40 high explosives.

the MiG-31 was as fast as the -25 and featured the most advanced weapon-system of it's era. any doubts ?

the USSR certainly did not waste millions of roubles for just a glimpse at a radar blip.

You are not seriousm are you? MiG25 was able to fly Mahc=3 for only few minutes and after landinf both engine should be replaced. SR71 could go as fast as M=4 in case of emergency, Mig 25 was build as response to B70 Valkyria project that never realized. 2 B70 prototypes spend as much time over M3 during their lifetime as one SR71 during ONE operational flight.
And shot down SR71? You can dream about it, even today (but no chance anymore, because maybe just now an Aurora is flyin over your head http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif ) and SR71 is a history..

R988z
12-21-2005, 04:27 PM
How do you KNOW the SR-71 can go mach 4? Got any proof or source for that? Quite a few internet fantasists claim black and blue that it does but have nothing to back it up other than their imagination and speculation.



The Russians were first with spy satellites I think, and they were WAY ahead on human intel, which is arguably more valuable than airborne data. It was relatively easy for the Soviets to infiltrate the free and open western society whereas it was very difficult to enter the heavily controlled communist eastern bloc.

It comes down to the US needing to do overflights to get the info it needed, Russia was able to place spies very high up so they were able to get stuff like the Atomic bomb secrets sooner they probably should have.

Badsight.
12-21-2005, 04:32 PM
they shot the U2 down

he had SR-71s overflying the USSR for such a long time that if they could have ever intercepted one they would have tried

no SR-71 ever was shot down despite 20 years of flying over the communist bloc

LEXX_Luthor
12-21-2005, 05:31 PM
In 1967 a CIA A-12 over North Vietnam captured a fragment from a S-75 missile detonation. What was needed to down SR-71s and A-12s with such old missiles were ~10kt warheads in the -E's.

geetarman
12-21-2005, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
pingu:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">ive always wondered if the russians had a similer plane, or just used satalites.
or just respected others airspace more..
Yes! Soviet long range penetration aircraft (say, Tu-95) were not as competitive with US air defences as US penetration aircraft were with Soviet air defences. USSR learned Respect for US air defence, but was unable to teach Respect to the US and so US was far more aggressive including launching thousands of balloons which on occasion caused air accidents in Soviet space (balloons and gondola painted blue for low visibility). Balloons were very hard to shoot down, often deflating slowly from standard gun/missile weapons.

US long range aircraft (say, B-47) were a match for early Soviet air defenses, both in terms of speed and altitude, but more importantly, the raw size and totally undeveloped nature of the areas the financially poorer USSR needed to defend was the major factor weakening Soviet air defence deployments which include airfields, radar controllers, and later, SAM sites. Traditionally, no nation faced threats from the North Pole until the Cold War and this diluted Soviet defence efforts. Many US spy planes were shot down in Cold War, but I don't know of any Soviet spy planes shot down by US air defence. If so, this would be because US was far more aggressive in flying over Soviet Union.

This topic, btw, is my primary interest in combat flight sims, and have to make it myself using StrikeFighters simulation with 3-rd Party aircraft mods but its brutal since that sim is created for tactical ops (aren't they all?)


Berg::
Mig-25R. It has been used for overflights of several other countries..Iran and Israel for sure.
When USSR can do it without being intercepted, they were as aggressive in spy flights as anybody. Its the same old Spit vs Ju-86P and MiG-3U vs Ju-86P story, when you can get away with it you do, when you can't you don't. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Indeed. Very interesting post and very understandable.

LEXX_Luthor
12-21-2005, 06:17 PM
Thanks, its rare when I do that -- post something readable, or worth reading. I'm really only just now learning about this subject so I yap alot about it testing what I've learned, since I got the StrikeFighters, and found it may be possible to mold it into a strategic air war simulation, more like Silent Hunter III than dogfight fps shooter. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

p1ngu666
12-21-2005, 07:25 PM
i heard that it was easier to russians to find out what the americans had, than what another military service had http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

u only need to damage a sr71, cos if a engine messes up then it can throw it into a spin, and itll fall apart http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

airdale1960
12-21-2005, 07:42 PM
LEXX_, Sorry for my late answers, I work weard times, and have occasional times I can surf. I was communications for the surveilance RADAR.

LEXX_Luthor
12-21-2005, 11:41 PM
Thanks airdale. Communications...did you work with intercepts and stuff like that?

pingu -- im almost ready to emil you. I'm constructing basic cirrus cloud patterns. I need to fit them together to make larger patterns. With 1000km maps or larger one almost considers creating cyclone rotations and the rotating cloud patterns, not going to do THAT yet though nowayno

sinzov
12-22-2005, 03:52 AM
again SR-71 / MiG-25 (it is really fun)

@ alert

intercepting an enemy is not only a question of speed, but of timing: to be at the right point at the right time. according to the neutral Swedes, the MiG did just this - flying slightly below and behind the helpless SR-71. this makes for a perfect snapshot for the infrared or radar guided R-40, which has an speed advantage over the Blackbird of some 1.000 km/h (btw: the MiG's engine had it's early troubles, but they were cured, so do not believe every myth of "changing engine after each flight").

no SR-71 every shot down: true enough, but why ? they simply stayed in international airspace with propably some very few & short dashes over exposed soviet islands, too short to bring weapons to action.

soviet overflights over u.s.-territory: how to manage them ? contrary to the USSR, the U.S.A was not surrounded bey enemy bases. and: why try overflights ? satellites did almost the same job. as for western europe, the soviets used unmanned yakovlev aircraft, flying at the speed and the hight of the SR-71.

cheers
Sinzov

StellarRat
12-22-2005, 11:18 AM
I dated a viggen once. She was a runner, but I don't think she could have caught an SR 5.

airdale1960
12-22-2005, 01:50 PM
LEXX_ We troubleshot all the comm lines and crypto for all of the space track and missle warning circuits. We also did the secure comm message routing, sending and receiving. We did the crypto change at the given times for all circuits. The best way to do the job was to forget what you saw, every day. It kept me very busy for the year.

jimDG
12-22-2005, 03:02 PM
SR71 vs. Mig-25. Both supprised and have to act. altitude 30km. Speed Mach 3. Head-on courses. 500m away from each other when they notice each other... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Viper2005_
12-22-2005, 06:40 PM
SR-71 didn't overfly the USSR - manned overflights were banned after the Gary Powers incident. That's why they built the D-21...

Anyway, the image I posted a few pages back was taken straight from the manual. From it you'll see that the design Mach number was 3.2, and that the maximum speed at sea level was 500 knots and that the useful ceiling was 85,000 feet, though this could only be attained in straight and level flight.

Mmo was 3.3, and this could only be attained under good conditions due to engine temperature limits.

Lightning would have had a very hard time intercepting the SR-71 because it would have had to use a collision course intercept. To reach 80,000 feet it had to be flying at supersonic speed, so the rate of closiure would have been around Mach 5.

With a radar range ~ 20 nautical miles the pilot would have been forced to rely entirely upon ground control to position him for his intercept.

Red Top was capable of collision course intercepts against supersonic targets, picking them up due to kinetic heating.

So in theory I'd say that a Lightning could have intercepted an SR-71. In practice I'd say that this would be rather unlikely!

SAMs would pose a greater threat than most fighters.

Most fighters would have serious trouble intercepting a Mach 3 target because the intercept geometry is very demanding. (A=V^2/R)

LEXX_Luthor
12-22-2005, 06:53 PM
airdale::
We troubleshot all the comm lines and crypto for all of the space track and missle warning circuits. We also did the secure comm message routing, sending and receiving. We did the crypto change at the given times for all circuits. The best way to do the job was to forget what you saw, every day. It kept me very busy for the year.
Aussom, thanks again. What were the "accomodations" like. I read some about Greenland and how they built that thing way up there in the arctic, a kinda massive "GreenHatten" Project that was so giant a construction.

CornbreadPattie
12-22-2005, 07:14 PM
SR-71's are rumored to have been shot down. I believe that over 7 were lost outside of the USA. As for proof, I don't have it, but just remember that it's a rumor and sometimes rumors turn out to be true. Here is an interesting site listing 12 SR-71 losses to accidents : http://www.voodoo.cz/sr71/sr71losses.html

Word of mouth is time tested. I think it's time to drop the official sources and find an inside source who is willing to talk, and with all of us in the thread, I'm sure we can get within a couple degrees of one.

OK?

LEXX_Luthor
12-22-2005, 07:59 PM
We may not need an inside source. Anybody who shot down an SR-71 or A-12 should(?) be more than willing to talk. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Of course, a damaged plane at Mach 3 may be lost later in the flight without the damaging party knowing the fate of their target.

Tex-Hill-AVG
12-23-2005, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by CornbreadPattie:
SR-71's are rumored to have been shot down. I believe that over 7 were lost outside of the USA. As for proof, I don't have it, but just remember that it's a rumor and sometimes rumors turn out to be true. Here is an interesting site listing 12 SR-71 losses to accidents : http://www.voodoo.cz/sr71/sr71losses.html

Word of mouth is time tested. I think it's time to drop the official sources and find an inside source who is willing to talk, and with all of us in the thread, I'm sure we can get within a couple degrees of one.

OK?

I don't know where you're hearing these rumours, but I think somebody is blowing smoke up your rear. The Soviets, (or any other Communist Block Nation for that matter), would have loved to have been able to humiliate the U.S. by shooting down the SR-71 just like they did with the U2.

The Soviets couldn't shoot it down for two reasons. The SR-71 flew beyond the Soviet's anti-aircraft (SAM) capabilities, and the SR-71's flight plans were such that it was not flying in Soviet airspace when intercepted by Soviet fighters.

A shoot down in international airspace would have more than likely led to war between the USSR & the US.

LEXX_Luthor
12-23-2005, 05:07 PM
Some internet posters post that SR-71 can do Mach 6.

Others post that Soviets shot down SR-71.

Add the two internet populations together and we find the Soviets shooting down Mach 6 airplanes.

berg417448
12-23-2005, 05:15 PM
Or maybe it was the SR-6 at mach 71! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif