Mig-25, the stainless steel Mach 3 beast of the '60s!
Posted by Opp-Contr@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 111 comments
Posted by Opp-Contr@reddit | aviation | View on Reddit | 111 comments
matthewe-x@reddit
So stainless steel just to deal with the friction heating?
JJohnston015@reddit
There was a show on the Discovery Channel years ago called "Wings of the Red Star", narrated by the late Peter Unstinov. In the episode on the MiG-25, it stated out with Sir Peter telling the story of an Israeli pilot who spotted this never-before-seen Soviet airplane over Egypt when they were fighting. He went after it, and, as Sir Peter told it, "...it accelerated to Mach 3.2, and disappeared."
Mao_Kwikowski@reddit
F-15s were made to eat the Foxbat for breakfast. Fox 3!
AFrozen_1@reddit
Ah yes. The jet that scared America so much they developed the best air superiority fighter in response til they got their hands on one and realized the MiG was a piece of junk in comparison.
Opp-Contr@reddit (OP)
Or alternatively, US tax payer had to be ripped off his cash i order to fill the pocket of shareholders of industrial military-complex, and what better excuse to do that than invoking a fake menace from the Soviets? #MuricanBoneHeads
AFrozen_1@reddit
Considering the lack of info on the foxbat at the time cause of the usual Cold War secrecy it makes sense that the US DoD would want a new fighter based on what they could garner from photos. As such they set out the requirements for what would become the F-15. Wouldn’t call it a “fake menace” cause at the time it was very much considered a menace.
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
Usual US intelligence failure.
The fact that the Mig-25 was flown by the PVO (Soviet Air Defences) should have been the first clue it was an interceptor and not a fighter.
ConclusionSmooth3874@reddit
Was USSR intelligence any better?
AFrozen_1@reddit
Maybe. But still, they see big wings with big engines and knowing the soviets have access to titanium it’s not that much of a stretch to believe they’ve came up with a fighter to beat the west and, in typical arms race fashion, America needed a response. It just so happens that our response outclassed the soviets. Go figure.
Guysmiley777@reddit
Tankie cope.
Revi_____@reddit
And who do you think paid for the Foxbat?
But somehow, this thing from the 60s is cool, but the F-15, which is still in active service after decades, is bad..
Or the Soviets did not have a DoD, I guess that is only an evil Western thing.
BrewCityChaserV2@reddit
Is this the plane where the engines destroy themselves if it flies above Mach 3?
egguw@reddit
it destroyed itself below mach 3, just at a slower rate
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
All engines destroy themselves. The J58 wasn’t exactly bullet proof either.
In a race to fly Mach 3 twice the Mig-25 would win handily.
egguw@reddit
i don't think the sr-71 required a full repair/maintenance after every flight even when flying below mach 3
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
It needed over a week of maintenance between each Mach 3 flight. This was why the cost to operate them were so astronomical in spite of only 20% of their hours flown being over Mach 3.
Meanwhile if you had $20k in the 90s or 00s you could go for a supersonic ride in a Mig 25.
ConclusionSmooth3874@reddit
But the mig 25 couldn't sustain mach 3 for the long, y'know, the main idea of the sr71?
DietrichLin@reddit
Actually the aerodynamic limits is 2.83 mach according to its manual
mdang104@reddit
And it was approved to Mach 3.2 in case of emergency.
DietrichLin@reddit
I can’t upload image or file through local,but there’s no evidence from envelope proves that.And aerodynamic limits means the boundary of an aircraft’s flight envelope,it can’t exceed that by any measure.
James_Gastovsky@reddit
I'm pretty sure it's limited by thermals, not aerodynamics
mdang104@reddit
Pm me. I’d be curious to see any documentations you have. This video talks about it.
mdang104@reddit
The engines burning themselves is a myth. The airframe was operationally limited to M2.85, but could be increased to M3.2 in war emergency which would reduce maintenance intervals. The R15 engines could be on afterburners for 40mins. There has been a case of a Mig25 exceeding Mach 3.5.
video
nighthawke75@reddit
The thing about engine design, is they still can't build one to sustain high Mach speeds. Lockheed built the hybrid turboramjet beast that drove Blackbird to cruise well above Mach 3.
Oh, and that's Soviet Titanium.
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
Better the engines than the entire airframe.
The SR-71 was unairworthy for a week after it flew Mach 3.
AlfaKilo123@reddit
Yup. Iirc, they were missile engines repurposed for an aircraft
DiscoPotado@reddit
You remembered wrong
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
It is a missile engine.
Just like the MD-80 uses a missile engine by way of the JT8D on the DC-9, J52 on the A-4 and A-6, and on the Hound Dog cruise missile.
MararOn@reddit
I actually think he was taught wrong, if I'm not mistaken not what you think on youtube said something like this
zippotato@reddit
Not entirely. While R15B-300 engine of MiG-25 wasn't a repurposed missile engine, it was a design based on KR15-300 engine that was originally developed for Tu-121 long-range cruise missile.
AlfaKilo123@reddit
Fair enough
1ThousandDollarBill@reddit
Yes
vanillamaster95@reddit
To be fair, almost all jet engines would destroy themselves above Mach 3
Goshawk5@reddit
I have always wondered what it would have been like had they made some out of titanium with the intent of it being an dogfighter.
Opp-Contr@reddit (OP)
Please note:
This plane wasn’t intended for dog-fighting. It comes from an era when bombers were still the primary means of nuclear weapons delivery and when countries around the world were deploying and studying new supersonic bombers : B-58, XB-70 project, Mirage IV, Avro 730 project, etc.
The Soviets felt the necessity to develop a fast, long-range interceptor that had to be cheap enough to be produced in large quantities. Those characteristics were dictated by the vastness of Soviet territory and the fact that NATO bombers could attack from any direction, the USSR being literally surrounded by NATO’s airfields.
US air defense didn’t have the same requirements. The only attack route for hostile bombers was Alaska and Canada, and flight time from Soviet airbases to reach populated areas in North America was very long, reducing the need for high-performance interceptors.
While jet engines at that time were ready to cope with Mach 3 speeds, the main problem when flying so fast is the intense heat that airflow generates on the fuselage, forbidding the use of classical aviation aluminium alloys.
The US decided to build the Mach 3+ recon plane SR-71 using advanced, even experimental, techniques and extensive use of titanium, a very expensive and dangerous aircraft, but unmatched in terms of performances. It was a very specialized aircraft ; very few were built (32), and more than a third was lost to accidents (12).
The Soviets had different requirements and developed a cheaper and more conventional, mainly stainless steel aircraft capable of an operational speed of Mach 2.8 while carrying missiles. It came in two flavours, interceptor and recon aircraft. At that time, very high altitude and Mach 2.5+ speeds were enough to evade most air-defense systems. It was later modernized, with more capable radar and electronics, giving birth to the MiG-31, still in use today, that found a new role as a hypersonic missile carrier.
Logical_Range_7830@reddit
The novel “MIG Pilot” is worth reading. It’s the story of Victor Belenko, the MIG 25 pilot who defected.
CplTenMikeMike@reddit
Yep, I have it too.
mongooseme@reddit
Read it when I was in high school. It's still on my shelf.
LimitofInterest@reddit
Excellent book even for those not interested in aviation at all. Sadly he recently passed away in 23'.
slpater@reddit
Most of the jokes about the MIG-25 stem from what the soviets claimed it could do. Which led the US to develop the F-15 as a response.
ccdrmarcinko@reddit
For the sake of historical accuracy can you provide proof what the Soviets said it could do ?
HarveyDrapers@reddit
Yea, it was more like the american intelligence agencies thought it based on satellite photos, I believe their worry was based on the size of the wings and not knowing the fact that it was made of stainless steel.
biernini@reddit
If by cope you mean burn themselves up with absurdly low time between overhauls, then sure. Soviet engine metallurgy was not great.
A Fiat 500 fitted with stainless steel piston rings, a dual-stage supercharger and a nitrous bottle can "cope" with 250kph for a dozen or two kilometres as well.
MandolinMagi@reddit
Let's be fair- the Soviets were pretty good, its just that jet engines default state is trying not to melt themselves.
Throwing in insane heating from going fast just makes things even harder.
biernini@reddit
I'm not suggesting the Soviets didn't make great aircraft from time to time. They did the best with what they had and usually what they lacked in leading-edge technological sophistication they more than made up for in robust over-engineering.
CommonRequirement@reddit
I love the story about the guy who defected in one of these. Hell of a way to escape the Soviet Union. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defection_of_Viktor_Belenko
CplTenMikeMike@reddit
Lt Viktor Belenko. I've got his book. Fascinating reading from back when the Cold War rendered the Soviets as a mysterious menace.
feather1919@reddit
The bird gets a lot of hate, but it did its job greatly. The Soviets just made people heavily overestimate the MiG-25.
mat101010@reddit
I flew in the MiG-25RU back in 2001. It was unfathomably hot and loud in the cockpit. When we landed, the fuselage was cooled with a firehose so the rubber bits on our suits and boots wouldn't melt.
https://i.imgur.com/8zkJu.jpg (MiG selfie at FL690)
hardly_even_know_er@reddit
How the hell did u swing that
mat101010@reddit
Dumb luck and a type-A personality intervention.
r/flying/comments/swyz5c/what_are_the_highest_and_lowest_hourly_rates/hxpng6h/
skimau5@reddit
Bruh the Foxbat 🍆🍆🍆
Repulsive-Debt-1129@reddit
All I see is a pair of engines with wings…
All jokes aside, what a beast the Foxbat was.
Opp-Contr@reddit (OP)
Precisely. This is just a very fast missile carrier, intended to be used in a complex ground controlled interception system. The pilot was not even intended to see the targets he was shooting at, nor firing the missiles himself.
007meow@reddit
A drone with slightly more flesh
SirPiffingsthwaite@reddit
Now if we can distil the flesh component down to just a brain...
CharcoalGreyWolf@reddit
And what a beauty it was designed to combat.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_XB-70_Valkyrie
Repulsive-Debt-1129@reddit
This program also birthed arguably the greatest fighter ever made, the F-15.
AnotherBasicHoodrat@reddit
Seeing all that electronic equipment shoved in the nose it kind of makes the running joke that Soviet aircraft still use vacuum tubes seem true
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
In the 1970s if you were at a Who concert and Pete Townshend windmilled that open A on We Won’t Get Fooled Again on his soon-to-be-destroyed Gibson Les Paul… you were hearing it through a Marshall stack powered by a head unit with tube amplifiers.
Solid state simply did not have the power or reliability at the time.
tinydevl@reddit
can confirm, lost some hearing after one.
AnotherBasicHoodrat@reddit
No it’s because Marshall tube amps have a very unique tone that even today is very popular
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
That unique tone is a byproduct of construction and harkens to an era. Much like pops and scratches on records or grain in film that is still used artistically to this day.
They didn’t design them to be like that. Heck.. a decade previously an overdriven amp was a highly undesirable thing.
AnotherBasicHoodrat@reddit
Indeed, one of the features that make Marshall amps unique and give them the 'British' tone is their hand wound transformers
sofixa11@reddit
To be fair, the original design is from the 1960s. Did you expect them to use the latest 5090 inside?
memeboiandy@reddit
I mean military tech is typically ahead of consumer grade stuff, so why didnt the soviets have 5090 Ti Super Maxs in them!!!! 😡
/s
QuaintAlex126@reddit
Gotta have those ray traced radar images bro
kalgsto@reddit
Reading the Wikipedia page about the Soviet pilot who defected in one of these (linked in another comment), I learned that they did indeed use vacuum tubes. Nuvistors, specifically: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuvistor
the_real_hugepanic@reddit
wasn't the joke on the NATO side, as vacuum tubes were resistant again EMP, where transinstors are not?
Mr_Lumbergh@reddit
That was what pushed the US to develop the F-15, so a win all around.
Revi_____@reddit
The real thing this aircraft achieved was forcing the creation of the F-15.
Thanks.
TommyTosser1980@reddit
I never quite understood why they didn't build planes like these out of titanium, it's not like they didn't know how to, or had few materials to work with, they made submarines out of the stuff.
zippotato@reddit
Soviets did use titanium for building MiG-25. A bit less than 10% of its mass was titanium.
Why didn't they use titanium more extensively? Well, titanium is expensive, not only by itself but welding it because of its high reactivity to oxygen at high temperature resulting in brittle titanium oxide formed along the weld line. A sealed environment purged with inert gas such as welding chamber is required to prevent this.
Since Soviets built about 1,200 MiG-25s compared to 32 SR-71s and 15 A-12/M-21s, they had to take cost and time into account.
TommyTosser1980@reddit
I get that, but they built subs out of titanium, it's so strange it wasn't more prevalent in their military aviation.
Conspicuous_Ruse@reddit
No, it is that they didn't know how to.
They didn't want to make it out of stainless steel, they had to. Titanium is really expensive and they didnt have the manufacturing capabilities to do intricate titanium yet.
They could do easier stuff, like submarine hulls and big structural plane components, but the precise welding and machining of thin titanium skin was beyond their ability at the time.
Opp-Contr@reddit (OP)
Cause it's cheaper to make it with steel.
Boundish91@reddit
Stainless steel? Wouldn't that be prohibitively heavy to build a plane out of?
ayyylmaowut@reddit
Story goes…US designed F-15 in response to the rumors of Soviets building something so large with such enormous engines…which would be as you described…so the US assumed Soviets were ahead of the game and that they (US) needed to get ahead of them or lose in the sky.
Lo and behold, F-15 was so over-engineered properly because the US was unaware that this behemoth was built out of…steel, not titanium or other composite breakthroughs. Performance was nowhere near F-15. But hey, at that point, F-15 was to be king of the skies for the foreseeable future.
thatguywhodrinks@reddit
104-0
Cool-Acanthaceae8968@reddit
The XB-70 was made of stainless steel.
lrargerich3@reddit
It is about as heavy as an Embraer 190!
The engines are beasts, the plane is extremely efficient once it goes past 40.000ft and about Mach 2, it is extremely inefficient at lower altitudes and speeds, once you get down you land it or run out of fuel, your call.
vertigo_effect@reddit
It flew, so nothing overly prohibitive weight wise about using stainless steel. It’s having to deal with pretty high kinetic heating so short of using titanium (which would be prohibitively expensive for more than the critical parts and harder to work in manufacturing) it is a pretty good choice. Even SpaceX’s Starship is largely made of stainless steel for similarly reasons.
elvenmaster_@reddit
Don't forget that SpaceX still has to prove the Starship is orbit capable 😁.
More seriously: it flies, sure, but with how much fuel, what payload, and what acceleration?
vertigo_effect@reddit
Damn. The pieces aren’t even cool yet and y’all already roasting them again.
Aerospace in a nutshell, eh. It’s all about compromises.
elvenmaster_@reddit
Well, that's precisely my point : yep, MIG-31 flies with full stainless steel airframe. But at what cost ?
As for Starship, there is no need to roast it. It already does it by itself.
wolftick@reddit
Just add more power!
AFrozen_1@reddit
Which is why the engines and wings were so big that it could lift the damn thing.
Mike__O@reddit
Yes and no. It ended up being a net negative for the MiG-25, but it wasn't an outright stupid decision as a lot of people like to claim. Stainless steel isn't an inherently bad material for aerospace applications, hell, Starship is made of SS.
Stainless steel is more heat resistant than aluminum, which is important when you're talking about Mach 3+. It's much cheaper and easier to work with than titanium. Not only does that reduce the per-unit cost of aircraft production, but it makes inevitable repairs much easier for field units vs having to resort to specialized shops that can work titanium.
VerStannen@reddit
Yes.
One of their reasonings for using SS was repairability in the field. Anyone with a sheet of metal could weld in a new panel and boom, good to go again.
That’s just one of the reasons iirc.
the_real_hugepanic@reddit
not if you want to fly fast... don't beliefe the russians are stupid....
the SR-71 with the (russian) titanium might be the more modern solution for this problem, but steel still has it's place for such applications.....
sofixa11@reddit
Hence the size
Intelligent_League_1@reddit
Yeah
mdang104@reddit
The engines burning themselves at high speed is a myth. The airframe was operationally limited to M2.85, but could be increased to M3.2 in war emergency which would reduce maintenance intervals. The R15 engines could be on afterburners for 40mins. There has been a case of a Mig25 exceeding Mach 3.5.
video
ukulele87@reddit
Always loved the look of this one, dont know why.
the_real_hugepanic@reddit
OP: you could have given Yefiim Gordon credit for using (at least 2) of his photos
https://www.amazon.com/Mikoyan-MiG-25-Foxbat-Guardian-Borders/dp/1857802594
I assume you have use the MIG-25 & MIG-31 book as you have used the combined MIG-25/31 development tree
https://www.amazon.de/Mig-25-Foxbat-Mig-31-Foxhound-Defensive/dp/1857800648
The_Canadian@reddit
That guy's books on the MiG-29 and Su-27 are absolutely fantastic.
motor1_is_stopping@reddit
If only the Soviets hadn't sold all of their titanium to Lockheed to build the plane that they were trying to stop...
Opp-Contr@reddit (OP)
MiG-25 was 16% titanium, it's missions were beyond stopping the "harmless" SR-71, B-52s and B-58s were it's primary targets. The Sr-71 was tamed with S-200, aka SA-5 Gammon
stevewithcats@reddit
Was the Mig-25 also one of the flying bars?
As it carried ethyl alcohol to cool the electronics like the TU-22 and it kept being drained to make hooch at airfields particularly remote ones .
Opp-Contr@reddit (OP)
The closer translation of the plane’s nickname was maybe "booze carrier." It was indeed very appreciated by the ground crew, as pure ethanol evaporation was the main means for cooling electronics as well as the pilot.
doomiestdoomeddoomer@reddit
sexy
Medula_@reddit
Mach 3 Stainless Steel Refrigerator
Broad-Log-125@reddit
Blackbird chaser.
Marionettework@reddit
Is this one of those?
https://maps.app.goo.gl/ifq587R3HQr64Xuw6
kalgsto@reddit
Happy Cake Day!
Careless-Resource-72@reddit
“Past end of runway, de-icing now ‘on’, leaving it ‘on’ for remainder of flight”
We gonna have a party tonight.
redmambo_no6@reddit
Soviets: Hey, check out our sweet-ass jet.
McDonnell Douglas: Hold our beer.
mechabeast@reddit
Single use
Enough-Meaning1514@reddit
Other than going very fast and very high, this aircraft's only contribution to the aerospace industry is the creation of the F-15 and unlike the F-15, the Mig-25 is almost irrelevant in a combat scenario. Also, let's not forget, the Mach-3 is achieved without any hard points on the wings, so, what is the point in that?
Opp-Contr@reddit (OP)
Protecting the immense soviet airspace against NATO bombers. This is an interceptor and reconnaissance aircraft.
Ric0chet_@reddit
Kinda cool looking plane. Shame it was the "Potemkin Village" or aircraft in the end. 8:8:1 what a ratio.