Questioned: Which SAMs & Aircraft Could Intercept The SR-71 Blackbird? | DCS WORLD
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 авг 2024
- 0:00 Intro
1:02 SAMs
8:06 Planes Scramble & Intercept
Mod Install Vid: • YF-12A Blackbird: Just...
Mods: • Free DCS Mods
SPONSORS
Winwing: www.wwsimstore.com/STORE
Winwing USA: fox2.wwsimstore.com/STORE
Sponsor Reviews: • Sponsor Reviews
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS(RUclips): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2(RUclips): / @grimreapers2
GRIM REAPERS(Odysee): odysee.com/$/invite/@grimreap...
GR PODCASTS: anchor.fm/grim-reapers
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDE: • DCS World Module Quick...
DCS OFFICIAL SITE: www.digitalcombatsimulator.co...
ONE TO ONE LESSONS: grimreapers.net/one-to-one-le...
DONATE/SUPPORT GRIM REAPERS
MERCHANDISE: www.redbubble.com/people/grme...
PATREON monthly donations: / grimreapers
PAYPAL one-off donations: www.paypal.me/GrimReapersDona...
SOCIAL MEDIA
WEBSITE: grimreapers.net/
STREAM(Cap): / grimreaperscap
STREAMS(Other Members): grimreapers.net/gr-twitch/
FACEBOOK: / grimreapersgroup
TWITTER: / grimreapers_
DISCORD(DCS & IL-2): / discord (16+ age limit)
DISCORD(TFA Arma): discordapp.com/invite/MSYJxbM (16+ age limit)
OTHER
CAP'S X-56 HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/open?id=1g7o...
CAP'S WINWING HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/drive/folder...
THANK YOU TO: Mission Makers, Admin, Staff, Helpers, Donators & Viewers(without which, this could not happen) xx
#DCSQuestioned #GR #SR71 #Blackbird #DCSWorld #GRDCSTesting #DCSTesting #Aviation #AviationGaming #FlightSimulators #Military 
Игры
watched an interview with a SR-71 pilot. He explained how, at that altitude & speed, the on-board computer is flying the plane. Even a minor error by the pilot can interrupt the airflow over the aircraft, but especially into the two Pratt & Whitney engines. He said, "there's been a couple of times during a turn or climb where the stick has been aggressively pulled out of my hand (by the computer) due to air intake issues.."
When the airplane says "get good". Scary cold war vibes.
And think about how primitive those computers were.
@@The_ZeroLine If a thing such as the Blackbird was born in the 60's, imagine what we have today...
You pull a bit too hard you turn into a million pieces. This thing can't take more then 3g.
@@rigel8755 aurora went california to hawaii and back in 15min. It was picked up on radar 12 years ago. Darkstar a la top gun maverick was 90s tech.
"At a mach speed of 3.8 but we've had reports of it going Mach 4."
The thing with the SR71/A12 is that it never had any safety governors added, it will literally fly faster and harder until it destroys itself, and the pilots... so the envelope was rarely tested.
Same with the MiG-25 Foxbat.
@@Dragonblaster1 It's been proven the Foxbat couldn't catch the Blackbird even if it tried it's hardest. The Foxbat was fast and impressive but the Blackbird was simply in a whole different league. It's far more than just not going it's fastest or it would destroy itself, the A-12 and the SR-71 had a very very deep well of potential speed that it couldn't tap into for a number of reasons. First of all it's engines actually weren't all that powerful, the Blackbird's speed wasn't achieved with the engines but rather it's aerodynamics. Second the Blackbird had a serious heat problem, Titanium was really the best option for the Blackbird for the time period and the Blackbird's speed was dictated by the Titanium's limitations. If the Blackbird was built today to modern specifications it would achieve speeds up to Mach 10 with no issue. If you believe that Aurora stuff than allegedly they already did and it's cruising at Mach 8 comfortably.
There is no plane like the Blackbird. Built in the 60s with 60s tech and over 50 years later it's still unrivaled in it's engineering. The Blackbird was also used for many other experiments, including an interceptor variant among some NASA tests. Whatever they wanted the Blackbird to do, it did it with success. It was just that good. The only reason why it was put out of service is because of politics. It was built at Area 51 and first mistaken as a UFO by the local population. It's been even speculated that it was created from reverse engineered UFOs. Incredibly unlikely but if you have a plane so mind blowing that even NASA in their prime orgasmed at the sight of the Blackbird than you have a true marvel of a plane.
@@BlvxkByrd And then there are people who say American's couldn't build planes... How wrong they are.
The Boeing 737Max also has no safety governors… #the_more_you_know
It's speed increased as it lost weight burning fuel. You can't know the max, because you have to be the a-hole that runs it out of fuel and NO the Foxbat had shitty engines and SR-71 was not in danger of destroying it's own engines/flying apart. It was going to be susceptible to some current or future SAM and that's why I think it got shelved. US Commanders saw the writing on the wall, the SAMs were getting closer and we had satellites now. No need to get anyone killed.
When in the MiG-25 you didn’t change the PRF to high. If it says ILV its swapping between high & medium. Put it on HI when you know the target is coming at you. The same with the Eagle too. You would’ve seen it from further away.
thx
@@jjnelson3232 ??? 29?? The comment was regarding the mig 25.
@@jjnelson3232 hmmm I don’t see any mig 29 in that comment
@@jjnelson3232 average illiterate person L
Fun fact, there was a variant of the F-15, 2 or 3 if I recall in total, which was designed for high altitude flight. Their mission, determine if it was possible to shoot down low earth orbit satellites during the cold war. Really interesting stuff!
do you have more info?
It was successfully tested the ASAT missile
Yeah an f15 did shoot down a sat successfully
From what I undertand it was a f15a which entered a 65degree zoom climb while at mach1.22. The Plane was the "Celestial Eagle" F-15A 76-0084
Incroyable.
Cap, we want more drag races! With all of the options DCS has now, I think we're long overdue for another one.
drag race at 65000 ft lol
Has anything actually changed/been added though? I don't think anything has changed since last race?
@@grimreapers Race all of the mods!
Mods 😁
Chinese/Russian ships launch SAMs
Simba in his Blackbird: "That's cute."
yeah I was too busy picking out what color fuzzy dice to hang on the mirrors
@@a_s_mikael it has censor to snap picture of soviet missile site from high altitude. no need for low flying thing.
@@a_s_mikael Why do you think satellites eventually replaced the SR-71? Anyway, the SR-71 didn't need high maneuverability when it had the altitude and speed. A slight turn when fired upon, and they'd often be out of the country in minutes. The missile would burn all of it's fuel trying to vector for an intercept, which it always had nowhere near enough energy to complete. Imagine; you target a plane 100 miles away flying directly at you and in an instant, it's 150 miles away flying away from you, at a speed faster than your missile travels. Your missile now has to not only expend energy to turn and vector for this new course, but also CATCH UP to the plane now running from it. The SR-71 literally maxed out the missile's capabilities.
@@a_s_mikael Satellites have predictable orbits that can't be easily changed. All one has to do to avoid a sat is time it so when it flies over, you have hidden your secrets away. Easy. They knew this way back in the 1960s. Spy planes can't be predicted in their flight path, and the modern replacement of the SR-71 are even faster, with better cameras/sensors, invisible to radar, and some don't even need a pilot. Spy planes will ALWAYS be better than satellites in terms of versatility.
Try diving before climbing again.
It works for the SR-71. It would take off, immediately refuel, climb, dive, gain speed quickly, and take that speed into the next climb.
They could just firewall it to get to altitude, but it burns way too much fuel.
Theoretically should work for the Fox Bat, without the refueling step.
thx
@@grimreapers I love the SR-71 ever since I was a young kid. They parked one of them on the Lackland parade grounds, before reveille, during the first round of retirements.
While they were parking the sled I was spitting out facts, I impressed the officer so much he let me sit in the cockpit while they painted the windows.
Technically that was very illegal, but that was just before the first Gulf war when security was a lot lower. It's also amazing what a precocious child can get away with.
That's my SR-71 story. Best day of my life.
@@grimreapers ruclips.net/video/bapyVoUb7U8/видео.html This video might help with the correct procedure, start watching at about 7:30. He calls it a 'dipsy-doodle'.
Fox Bat needs ground coordination and needs to take off at way bigger distance from SR-71 to intercept SR-71 to have time to climb 20000 meters or more while they still have each other at 11 to 1 o'clock. So there is the edge where SR-71 could do its job without being intercepted going close to edge of frontier or going not very far into territory of USSR. Going in by 200 km and more into the territory of USSR the chances that SR-71 will be intercepted by Mig-25s grow a lot.
When the SAAB 37 intercepted it, Swedish Air Force tracked the SR-71 over most of its mission. The SAAB 37 climbed as high as it can go, then set off in a steep dive exchanging height for speed, sneaking up behind the SR-71 climbing back up, and snapping a picture.
Oh it’s a pity the SR71 can’t carry a LGB, imagine an SR71 releasing one over a….
…US Carrier Group!
Perhaps hacking the internal stores of a YF-12?
Its basically an unpowered, laser guided Phoenix at that point
It would actually exceed the Laser range which I believe is 10miles (60,000ft)
@@grimreapers good point. GPS(JDAMs) though...
I also found another "Flanker Hug" incident but in Mirgorod AFB, Ukraine.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-39_Small_Diameter_Bomb
Could this fit?
Cap: “I don’t know what I’m doing wrong.”
Simba: “EVERYTHING.”
Could you imagine doing this in real life? I love the stories of these pilots. Truly a marvelous piece of engineering. The best bird ever made. Imagine if this did more than reconnaissance.
Wondering why you didnt go with a half fuel loaded F-15?
It zoom climbs even better than the F-16 does. The F-15 in that configuration shot down a damned satellite, which goes WAY WAY faster and is WAY WAY HIGHER than the SR-71s envelope. You could probably get a decent zoom climb on a half loaded F-15 up to 110k ft.
Hell even in real life, Foxbats got that high. They'd hammerhead at 90 to 100k ft in their attempts to get the Black Bird.
I also doubt the F-22 is truly accurately modeled. For one the radar control is classified so you're kinda, restricted. But, two; the F-22s kinematics are about the same as the F-15s at high altitude. The F-22 is a bigger, heavier aircraft. The F-15 actually would out zoom climb the Raptor. What makes the F-22 so deadly is that for it's size, it's as nasty as an F-15 above 19k ft, and also as nasty as the F-16 BELOW 19k ft. The F-16 is a sub 19k ft monster, while the F-15 is a 30k ft monster. The F-22 is effectively two in one. That's what makes it such a marvel.
Here is proper one: ruclips.net/video/BNJaMngvmcE/видео.html
All that you say, plus F-22 really introduces a whole new envelope: It's said the Raptor can still manage a 6G pull while at 60,000ft...and 1.2 Mach. Apparently a lot of that is down to the thrust-vectoring feature (which is what that is really for, as opposed to low altitude airshow stunt stuff), which acts to trim the aircraft so that it gets more control authority from smaller movements of its already pretty huge control surfaces.
The whole point of the ATF program was to built an aircraft that would always have 'the perch,' with regards to radar detection range, altitude performance, and just plain speed (made more practical with the emphasis on supercruise without afterburner). One of the subtler touches is the high altitude performance of the engines. The Pratt F119s are plenty powerful in the usual stats, typically quoted as ~35,000lb/thrust--although they say 39,000 is maybe more the mark. But that's static at sea level; the neat thing is that they maintain a much higher proportion of thrust, especially dry thrust, at altitude, when compared with other modern turbofans.
@@n.w.1803 yeah the Raptor is pretty neat.
The ATF program specifically called out a new class for it, 'Air Dominance' Role. It kills everything. Anything. It just kills it. And instead of being just a role of one particular type, it's role is simply to be so good that it basically reduces all other rivals to Asymmetric Warfare, because the advantages were so high.
It's not longer Air Dominance as it was but it's still overpowered. It's also very expensive and hard to maintain, unfortunately. The F-35 really does do a waaaaaay better job at getting out Sorties Per Dollar than the Thicc F-22. The damned RAM on tbr F-22 is annoying as shit.
The maneuverability at Mach is the insistence and lineage from General Dynamics. The F-16 is also maneuverable at Mach. It's awesome knowing how much GD lives on inside the F-22. GD Ft Worth was an awesome company.
The F119-PW-100s are amazing because it has contrarotating stages rather than just stator vanes. Each stage is a bladed rotor. The contrarotation allows the F-119 to more efficiently increase that compression ratio, making for some seriously thick oxygen to burn with fuel. To increase that richness, the F119 also has bypass tubes much like the SR-71s J58s. However, they don't dump extracted compressor air into the afterburner tube; they instead dump into the combustors, near the rear of them. This is how it maintains good thrust even at high altitudes.
I've always said that what really makes the Raptor so amazing is how good it is for ITS SIZE. It's a monster of a fighter. Twice the size of an F-35 and the F-35 is quite abit fatter than the '16. The F-22 is huge and yet has kinematics that smaller foreign aircraft only dream of.
The only thing some what disappointing is the Super Cruise. It's a rather overrated feature. Yeah, it doesn't require burner to break Mach but it still surprisingly guzzles gas like no tomorrow. Going super sonic is simply hard. It's like driving through a wall. It's amazing something so thic can go 1.5 without going wet at all, IMO.
Somebody must put together an English Electric Lightning mod. I am suprised that there isn't one already because it is without doubt one of the greatest British aircraft of all time. I am not sure but I think its ceiling may still be classified, I know that in the 2000's there was one flying still in South Africa with a private company that could be hired to take you to 80,000 feet. Think of that for great engineering, a 50 plus year old aircraft that could still zoom climb to those heights. That is as high as they are willing to take you but the aircraft is willing and able to do more. People go up to see the curve of the Earth. Breathtaking!
Its literally just flying engine, afaik very barebones combat capabilities so i dont get where is your enthusiasm coming from.
Soviets do it better with mig23 and i see people taking turns shitting on it but omg the English Electric is mentioned and everyones pants are on the ground shitting themselves.
You could've done it much easier with the AIM-54s. Also, the interceptors would've been scrambled much further away than 200 miles.
Sr would be near max speed and altitude ahead of time. Hence why it was never shot down
no you couldnt have, aim-54 isnt exactly designed for that
What’s crazy to think is how this tech and innovation was created in the 60’s!! It’s just insane to think about the abilities and capabilities the American’s have. So glad to see them increasing their budget and heading back into their R&D. Looking forward to seeing them get back into the microprocessor field they created and bringing manufacturing back to the U.S. It’s an exciting time for American innovation and manufacturing 👍🏻
I recall a blackbird pilot on Movers channel talking about how other aircrafts list their top speed being close to the blackbird, but he chuckled saying they could only hold that speed for a few moments in afterburner, while the blackbird could sustain that speed for the entire flight and the actual top speed of the blackbird is more than is actually reported
They don't even hide it, people just don't think further because we cannot have any more ideas, the recorded max speed of a SR-71 is 3.529km/h, but that *isn't* near as fast as it can go while already disintegrating itself, they just never tested it... or did they? There was a short period after his retirement where NASA used it for research.. god knows what kind of research.
Got to do a walkaround for an SR71. Touch surfaces, looked down nacelles. I was surprised that up close, it didn't really feel that big. Thrill of a lifetime.
nice
Hi Cap, great video as always. I read that the technique for an intercept of an SR-71 on a Baltic Express mission out of RAF Mildenhall was done by MiG-25PD fighters approaching the intruder in a wide curve on a parallel course, which resulted in a separation of a few kilometres to get a solution. The soviets would know there was a ongoing mission from spy ships monitoring radio traffic in the north sea, and would use a best guess for the approach path, apparently their were limited options for SR71 pilots. They use the alarm call - ‘Jastreb’ (hawk) which meant that a Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird was approaching.
thx
MiG-25's have been seen on radar at 2 km behind SR's by Norwegian operators.
This game seems to not account for geographical latitude. Stratosphere is hotter to the north and cooler towards the equator. Planes get slower towards the north pole. SR is Mach 3.2 at 55° and MiG-25 is Mach 3.2 at 55°... Thus in the same latitude north of 33° the MiG is always faster.
If you were to launch in the direction that the SR-71 is travelling and let it over take you, you could possibly perform a missile hand off, like in a relay race. You can't match the speed, but you would stay in radar tracking range longer. You just need an A2A that can catch it.
i doubt that you can shoot a SR-71 going at Mach 3.2 from behind... The missile would run out of juice long before getting close to it... Just remember that at merge there still is about 20000 feet (6000m) difference in altitude between interceptor and SR-71 which need to be covered by the missile...
I think that's what happened with the Viggen-Blackbird intercept
@@boymahina123 Its one thing getting a radar lock, totally different thing to hit it with a missile.
Its true that viggen got multiple radar locks during SR71 baltic recon missions, but no chance for it to hit.
@@deadphone9639 Hence, just like OP said, one still needs the AAM technology to reach out and touch a plane doing around 1 Mach number more than the speed of the launching aircraft at launch while also gaining 20-30k feet to catch up with it.
Any contemporary jet could intercept it as the EE Lightning and Viggen did. They used oncoming approaches with known flight paths and times; a detail which makes the intercepts significantly less impressive and more trivial.
Russia can do it again)) enjoy history trolls en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1960_U-2_incident
@@zeblanmaidaynovich796 do what again
@@apollopollo622 Collapse?
While ja37 have excelent preformance, its really the superioer digital radar that was they key to intercept
Yep the U2 and the sr71 are the same plane. Cheers for your insightful comment. You clearly are very bright. 👍🏻
Considering the Sr-71 flys so high it’s not just that it’s fast but it doesn’t have to be directly over a target to get good pictures. At its operational altitude the distance to the horizon is around 360 miles or 600 kms. So it can skirt the edges of surface to air missile’s maximum ranges and make interceptions by interceptor aircraft that much harder when it’s that much further away. Not to mention it can sustain speeds of Mach 3 for much longer than the fastest interceptors can at least if they don’t want to burn out their engines.
The Blackbird is the only aircraft that I know of at least that can run full afterburner all the time and is actually more fuel efficient the faster it goes. Nothing else can do that and be able to stay stable at that altitude at that speed and be able to also pull off any kind of interception. There would have to be some seriously rare conditions at play to pull it off at least. Not to mention it’s radar signature would be hard to track even now if we were talking about missiles.
@@Beer-can_full_of_toes The concord was like that.
I do not think many people on thee comments understand the complexity of high altitude flight. While Missiles can technically get to that altitude they simply cannot operate at that altitude with an aircraft travelling at that speed.
While the engineering does exist to make counter measures to an SR-71 there are no systems that have been built that could take it down as no country has the resources to build such a system.
Sr71 is faster than a bullet what an engineering marvel. The sr71 might of had radar absorbent or reflectant skin. That might be why you can catch him on radar. Great video guys love the content
Things i learned today:
Simba is downright the better pilot.
pfft
We’ll see if this is revisited once DCS has a MIG-31 “Foxhound” add on.
We do have a Mig-31 but it is very poorly modelled currently. Need a proper one.
@@grimreapers Shame that we probably wont see it. Foxhound is still in active service, and Russia is notoriously stingy about releasing information for even their older out of service planes, let alone one one in active service.
Similar issues still remain, the interceptor needs to know exactly when and where the SR-71 is arriving, and must basically be at the end of the runway ready to go with all intercept variables performed perfectly to the second. The issue is that any deviation by the SR-71 of even a few degrees (and they'd do this intentionally) means that it's now literally impossible to achieve an intercept, even in the 31.
@@EstorilEm detecting SR-71s from far away with ground radar isn't that hard. Ground control would actively calculate where the SR-71 will end up and remotely guide a group of always-ready Mig-31s from separate airfields via datalink, guaranteeing at least one of them will to take the perfect approach from hundreds of miles away. The SR-71 can't do much about it because at top speed it can only fly in a straight line or it self-destructs, and at lower speeds it lacks the acceleration to escape from interceptors. It's how they were "intercepted" on a few occasions in the 80s (basically they were locked on and forced to turn back) after which they stopped flying over soviet territory.
@@KekusMagnus wow, i never aware of that limitation. Can i please request links on article, itv, or news on that story?
I'd love to see a campaign start off with some SR-71 intel gathering before moving on to the air war / Arma ground battle.
agree
How soon will we see a Red bull tunnel challenge/reenactment?
hmmmm...
The SR-71 to me is simply amazing. Also, it can be used in Spinal Tap:
"If you can see... the numbers all go to 3.8"
"Ah, and most aircraft go to 2. Does that mean it's faster?"
"Well its more than 1.8 faster. I mean most blokes are flying at 2, and they're all the way up, and all the way up flying their plane, and where they going to go? Nowhere exactly. What we do, if we need that extra bit of speed, we go to 3.8, 1.8 faster."
"Right, what if an airplane with weapons is built that can go to 3.8?"
"This one goes to 4"
So happy to see the Grims testing blackbirds finally.
Not sure why you keep yelling "CLIMB!" lol, this is a completely different type of evasion than a standard SAM firing. At these speeds and (initial) altitudes, any lateral deflection from the initial flight path is FAR more difficult to adjust for than a change in altitude. This was mirrored in many SR-71 driver interviews; adjust the speed and turn a few degrees and the missiles simply don't have enough time or energy to account for the changes. Simply climbing is probably the EASIEST thing for SAM's to adjust for, as it just has to slightly alter its pitch or burn time - unless you're at 100,000' +, which honestly is unrealistic even for the SR-71.
Bingo, that thing was and is impossible to hit if they actually try to evade you.
@@30AndHatingIt It really isnt.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Hundreds of attempts, zero successes. See my other comment.
@@30AndHatingIt Not with anything thats supposed to hit it, and never in a realistic scenario.
Iran doesnt exactly have the coordination, early warning and interlinked air defense network of the soviets.
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 You think the Soviets had no equipment and personnel in any of those countries that made attempts, while coincidentally being aligned with said countries? Next you'll tell us the Soviets had no air assets in Korea off-the-record.
There Was an Armed Interceptor Version of the SR-71 called the YF-12, Would love to see one doing a bombing run, or take out a Chinese carrier
Not sure what munitions options you’d have in the yf-12 for ground attack. It was designed around the AIM-47 air to air. Maybe you could fit modern fire control radar and a smart bomb but the warhead load would probably be pretty poor.
Kelly Johnson actually had concepts for a bomber version of the Blackbird, according to his right-hand man Ben Rich in his book “Skunk Works”. With the success of the CIA’s A-12 and the pending SR-71 for the USAF, Kelly had Gen. Curtis LeMay’s ear and was pushing the YF-12A interceptor version and a bomber version. The Skunk Works crew had even theorized “energy weapons” that would have been bomb shapes with no warheads, and would have used the massive amount of kinetic energy from being released at high altitude and airspeed for their destructive power (like having a meteor hit your house), though guidance would have been an issue to work with given the technology at the time. Apparently SecDef Robert McNamara wasn’t too interested though, blowing off Kelly’s sales pitch. Oh, to think of what could have been.
YF-12 is not the same as the SR-71 nor could it do exactly the same thing. And the reason for this is that the SR-71 had a very specific specialized set of operational capabilities. While they are based on the same sort of engineering they are not the same.
If the mig 25 could see him and almost knock it down, mig 31 certainly could have done that much further and earlier, the pilot made the mistake of deciding to turn
It is a fantasy that people have. There is nothing that can take down the SR-71. Nobody has developed an operational tracking system and guidance system that can hit anything at that altitude at that speed.
While it is technically feasible to develop such technology from an engineering point of view today nobody has done it.
What makes the SR-71 unique is its altitude and speed.
An English Electric Lightning would have been an interesting addition to this if you had one.
Even assuming it was xr749 which did once reach 88,000 feet briefly in a ballistic flight (it was an f3 with the smaller ventral tank, but fitted with the avon 301r's, and had the guns deleted) it'd of been one hell of a task to get a red top on target, you'd have to intercept head on, with a closing speed of possibly mach 5
@@thephantom2man The English Electric Lightning did intercept a U2. The was also various chatter of a Lightning pulling along side an SR-71 only to then have the SR vanish in a blue streak when it applied power. The Lightning was a brute for its time. On a full recon run the SR-71 was way to fast in a tail chase. But it does show the EE Lightning’s time to altitude.
15:40 I paid the whole runway and 'm gonna use the whole runway!
Great stuff by the way.
Unfortunately the mod for the Mig-31 is really bad and only allows the aircraft to do around 50% of its speed and altitude
great vid. when I was in the USAF, the Interceptors at the base, were F-16's very nice aircraft
Maybe the tactic of flying directly at the target reduced your chance of success. Maybe each of you take a vector 45 degrees "off axis." Just a thought. Keep up the great work!!
About the SAM, how about if the Blackbird moving 90° angle passing the site instead running straight to it? Actually running straight to the radar is also a trick to avoid the missile.
Secondly, there's no Vega missile? The S-200. It was a very long range SAM.
It was I who asked the question. Thanks for the video. The turn around was most impressive. I expected weeks lol.
Edit: That was an excellent effort. I wasn't expecting any US jet to get even close. I assumed a Mig 25 might. Obviously not. I also assumed a Patriot or S - 400 would also. It was a great watch. Thanks for all the hard work.
Thx Mark x
I'd immagine the numerous anti-satellite missiles or midcourse ABMs in service but not modelled in the game can do that.
You should have faith in the plane. Fly it in a strait line at 3.32 and 80,000ft (give or take) or 90,000ft if you want A-12 altitudes. The only deviation should be banking across the horizon left or right but never pitching up or down too dramatically. The constant change in vector will give the missiles a good workout, when you stretch out speed,distance and altitude things almost start to act in deltaV's and when the missiles burn their fuel out and reach the thin air they can only do so much before there is nothing to grab onto and they end up burning their kinetic energy trying to compensate. Let us see just how thin the blackbird can push it. A good example of a "turn" or bank would be the overflights of North Vietnam.
I'm surprised the F-14 wasn't able to get the intercept. With its powerful radar and the AIM-54 it was built for exactly this kind of mission.
tbf they only tried it once and with an AI rio. A good human rio would make a big difference I think
@@stinkyfungus it was also designed to destroy the KH-22 missiles they fired(?) That can reach more then m.3 before the dive to to the target
@@lil__boi3027 no it wasn't, in real life it has next to no chance in hitting them.
@@nagantm441 you have anything to read about it's preformance regarding this?
@@lil__boi3027 ruclips.net/video/CtTy8_T3HU8/видео.html
Regarding how to aim your radar; it takes some trigonometry, but if you know the distance to your target and it's elevation above you, you should be able to compute the angle you need to elevate to point your radar at it.
28:19 - So assume he's at 85,000 ft, 50nm from you.
So that's a distance of 303806 ft, and an elevation of 30,000 ft.
Your angle to elevate/aim your radar right then would be:
tan(x) = 30,000/303806 = 0.099
tan-1 0.099 = 5.7 degrees.
Now, in the middle of an intercept, that might not be helpful, but if you know where it's going to be, you can compute for it. Or you could do what you did with the F-16 and ask a more comprehensive radar to track it. :)
thx
@@SilverHwk7 this woud probably be way easier if they used metric in aviation. Also you have to consider your own attitude so if your nose is already 15°up for your climb and you are and you point your radar 30° up that's already 45° and with an altitude difference of 8km this will give you a detection range of 8km and with closing speeds of mach 4+ that is less then 8s reaction time so you already lost. This is just regarding regarding the failed attempt to pick him up after 18:30
I'm surprised you didn't try the BAE/English electric lightning, and the Saab viggen seeing as they are the only aircraft, as you said, that actually did it in real life, although only in an exercise, or is that the reason why you didn't run them?
I knew a flight engineer on the SR71. He was a very good friend. I had clearance at another company and I asked him questions about the capabilities of the Black Bird. What he told me that every aspect of the performance is classified and will never be released. So what we don't know would be more interesting than what we THINK we know.
Dude, your not gonna keep the zoom climb if you keep pulling up to 50 degrees pitch everytime, keep it lower and keep your speed
I assume there is a Vy? (Best Rate of Climb with Burners on)
@@kristianmurphy4308 yeah every jet would have one but hes climbing toward the end at like 220 knots which I can assure you is definitely not Vy for any of them
id love to see how an ee lightning and 104 starfighter would do in this test. the lightning was the only thing to sucsesfully intercpet concorde from the rear in the 80s
Hopefully part3
.
....
My favorite story about the SR-71 is that they retired it, twice, and still sometimes use them, because nothing else can compete
I'd like to have seen those last jets do the trick i know they can, STOL. If you hold the brakes and crank the thrust, you can almost take off immediately
While technically it probably could do a STOL it simply then would not be capable of operating at its maximum capabilities.
USA didnt use the sr-71 since 1999.. however, they can use him but they have no reason because it'll cost them a lot to bring the sr-71 even tho he's still great aircraft
The info is out there but you might have to dig a little to find it. Lockheed Martin made several different variances of the SR-71. I was told that there was a model of the SR-71 that was capable of Mach 6+. Yes, I said Mach 6+. There is a pilot (contractor) for the CIA that was interviewed and described one of his flights in the SR-71. And how he took it up to Mach 5.85 before he started to back it down. Said, it started to scare him. But, also said that the aircraft had plenty more power left in it. Then was asked how fast did he think the aircraft was capable of going. He said "Mach 6+ easy". Meaning : this pilot was basically saying that he had the throttle at 80% at Mach. 5.85 before slowing the aircraft down. Obviously, there's more in this interview but either way. There was also a NASA pilot that had a similar flight in a SR-71.
Our local base had the Blackbird back in the 60s and 70s. As kids, we saw it in the skies a lot. While I was in the USAF, I heard a few facts about it. It's so fast, it takes an area the size of Texas for it to make a u-turn. During air refueling, the tanker has to go as fast as it can, while the Blackbird has to go as slow as it can for the two to connect. When it was shot at by North Korea, it was able to project several radar images of itself to throw off the missiles.
the A12 has suffered minor damage from an SA2, during the Vietnam war. After having 7 U2's downed, it was a great risk to procure the program, because a downing of one would be catastrophical for the US
The A-12 damage was on 1 of the canted tail wings, they think it was from a SA-2 that exploded somewhat close by
@@donaldwoodworth1202 Debris from an SA-2 explosion would have slowed quickly from drag... an SR-71 striking a piece of shrapnel that has slowed to it's terminal velocity may as well have been shot with a bullet. Blind luck and probability are probably what got a hole in that particular aircraft...
Yeah, blind luck, a barrage of missiles was fired on it, one exploding 50m from the aircraft, and that was a bloody SA-2, which downed 7 U-2's .. it was one piece of shrapnel, deffinately scared the sh...t out of some of the top brass and was an important factor for the decision to retire it.. And the A12 and all Sr 71 variants have my true respect and I think that nobody in his/her right mind could objectively talk bad about the planes . I Mean, just look at them! Look at them now, in 2021, or whatever year is it when you are reading this) and it still looks like it came from a sci fi movie and most of it's characteristics are unmached to this day, after 60 years .. one thing that can make you look down on it is the number of crashes (not caused by enemy fire) A12- 6/15 and the Sr71 12/32 which is a lot but something like it never flew before and it was complicated..
@@beyondrecall9446 The wall of text gives me the idea that you took the wrong impression. The blind luck belongs to the missile crew that basically shotgunned explosive telephone poles at what would have been known by then to be a practically impossible target.
@@mfree80286 Wel,they didn't know that since it was not a sact and if it was hit by one piece, proved that it isn't invincible.. what if luck was on their side that day.. And what better option did they have, seeing it come for another turn.. at least they got the altitude right and them to retire it so.. that barrage of such an antique weapon did prove to be someewhat effective.. The 60's brought new innovations and the SA3 would hit two F117's that were just being developed using works from soviet scientists so now.. 60 years later, and the F35's cross section doubles that of the F117 but where has missile tech come..
Really interesting times.. First time that you can see that someone might challenge America.. Never had a war where they lost many soldiers as well..
hi cap
The EE Lightning and Viggin caught the U2 and not the SR-71. and great vid as always
Alternate title: Simba discovers the joys of space travel
5:05 "now he is going to put the hammer down" LOL as Simba is already doing mach 42 at 105,000 ft. Its like the race scene in every movie. Protagonist sees baddie inching closer so decides to really floor it, past the floor board the accelerator was already smashed against.
To be fair, based on pilot stories they pretty much never gave as much throttle as they could, even when being fired upon.
the F-15 shot down a satellite in the early 90s, id say using the same setup there. a blackbird shootdown could have been possible. probably the earliest tech capable of doing so.
F-15 superiority
If you build a rocket that can travel at the same speed as a bullet you can sit on the rocket and capture the bullet with your fingers.
People have to be realistic in regards to this.
The USSR model for high altitude intercepts was to first find the bogie with high powered ground RADAR, and then vector the interceptor to the threat.
big radar and a datalink > interceptor kinetic performance
@@mikedelta1441 the mig-25 wouldn't even be flown by the pilot. It would be flown to the target by datalink updates to it's autopilot and it's radar would also be remotely controlled. All the pilot would have to do is fire when given a shoot cue.
yeh we need GCI
Yup it worked out well for shooting down the blackbird. What were they? 0-200?
@@CrotchRocket78 the USSR never tried to shoot one down
The picture through the mirrors at 18:20 was like flying into an infinity mirror.
Would’ve liked to see the AVRO Arrow with the Iroquois engines.
Question: Can a nuke kill an SR-71?
There was a fear among SR-71 pilots that the USSR would be desperate enough to intercept one that they would detonate nuclear warheads on the ground when one flew over. So, can dropping a nuke from a Mig-21 kill an SR-71 just through its splash damage?
I mean a S-75 Dvina (SA-2) fragment managed to damage an A-12...nukes would not be needed.
Why would the USSR detonate a nuke on the ground when the SR-71 didn't fly through Soviet airspace?
wow!
"splash damage" is such a cringe gaming term lol. Why would the USSR destroy their own homeland to prevent a few pictures from being taken? At the end of the day you have to remember the SR-71's mission, it was just recon. There's ABSOLUTELY ZERO CHANCE they'd nuke themselves to prevent some photos from being taken. It's not even worth discussing.
And no, there's no "splash damage" when traveling at 3600 feet per second. By the time the flash was seen, a few degrees deviation of course would send the plane miles away from the blast at cruise altitude.
@@EstorilEm If its already flying over a nuclear test range, its not a problem.
And it only takes a fraction of a second for a nuclear fireball to hit 80,000ft
MiG-25 and MiG-31 are not intended for scramble at all. Both are high-alt long-range missile platforms intended for hours-long patrolling borders. Start from 9-12 km altitude at subsonic and it will be as intended.
What makes the SR-71 so hard to take down is a combination of speed, altitude and its fuzzy radar presence.
By the time it is tracked and position established it is gone. It is like saying that you can build a high speed rocket that can travel at the same speed as a bullet so therefore you can catch the bullet with your fingers if you are sitting on the rocket.
The MiG-25 is in no way a long-range or long-duration aircraft..
This is so cool!
Great video. How about intercepting the high-speed low-level lancer before it bombs a target.
The trick to intercepting a SR-71 is .. you get up to altitude the opposite direction the plane is coming that you want to intercept. Then you turn around and try to get a lock.
your missiles will never catch it.
No joke, speed was its only weapon and a electric jammer
@@mikedelta1441 He means turn and face oncoming so the missiles wouldn't be trying to catch. The point was to not fly towards while gaining altitude. That said I'm not sure it's a good idea or not.
@@stinkyfungus
True.. true. You always turn around just before the service ceiling.
Interesting idea.
Looks like you need to take some lessons from Simba about how to climb effectively.
agree
My Unkle, engineer who worked for Lockheed, was so proud of this plane. Surprised he didn't stick a Clemson Tiger print on one.
Later he talked about having to go to area 51 when he wasn't working on it just to confuse the Russians. When he retired from Lockheed he said he was glad not to have to take polygraphs anymore. I asked if he had to take them often. He said sometimes multiple times a day. They created one he'll of a machine.
Very interesting. How accurate is the oxygen model vs altitude? I'd expect a flameout of the SR-71s J58 engines going that high, if you didn't stall the wings out first. Either way very entertaining! I love all the simulated tests you guys do!
The SR 71 was quite stealthy for its time.
I'd like to see what NASMS can do vs cruise/ballistic missiles/other incoming ordnance.
Good idea.
Is there a nasams in DCs? Mod or not
“If you’re going to intercept you’ve got to get rid of that fuel”, the guy who took out the blackbird had a full fuel load….
Cap heres one for you. Great vid! But anything Blackbird is awesome!! However.....The SR71 would be routed to make interception harder. It could easily fly 100+ nautical from the airbase and tell what colour of coffee the guy in the tower was drinking 😉 ( slight exaggeration there) As such I suggest trying an interception when the 71s heading is at say 90° to you heading used in this test with closest approach to the airfield of say 100 nautical. I'm guessing you would have a 200 or 300+ nautical run up to that closest point for the 71 to simulate the awacs and or ground radar tracking? Could the F16 with modern missiles still scramble and intercept then, since it would be a vectored approach to target? And what angle and direction (head to head or carefully timed tail chase where the 71 crosses the nose of the F16 in an overtake) would be best as the 71 attempts a pass of the airfield at that distance offshore? This is similar to how the Soviets had to attempt intercept in reality.
Will try!
The F-104 set lots of climb, speed and altitude records, and was designed by the same guy as the SR-71....
You guy need to have a broader scan front too "paint that fast of a plane". Cover more sky ....power in radar isnt the way, coverage is.
An AWACS might help.
Ok here's a fun thought too. most interceptors are on ready 5 status. what this means is, the aircraft are prepped and set to be able to take off within 5 minutes. that 5 minutes is key though. the aircraft aren't powered up at the time. The crew will sit in the aircraft often for hours on end waiting, then have to be able to run through the startup checklist and launch the aircraft. so. lets say you detect the SR-71 at 250 miles out... thats a nice safe distance, call your ready5 aircraft, they start up their planes, run down their startup checks, get everything in line, talk with the tower, and do their take off.
in that same 5 minutes... the SR-71's closed 183 miles. so now its just 67 miles from you when you get your wheels off the ground. LOL.
thx
@@grimreapers Welcome... but its one of those funny things... to intercept an SR-71, they had to KNOW where it was and was going... often between the time they detected it, and plotted its course, there simply wasn't enough time to get interceptors into the air in its path.
Now, on the flip side. youtube video "SR-71 speed check" LOL... its an SR-71 pilot having fun with air traffic controllers.
A truly AWESOME aircraft for those of you who've never seen it up close or heard it take off or on a low fly by.
MiG 31, F 14, F 22. Before watching, that my list of capable aircraft.
I would agree in real life assuming proper GCI guidance.
@@grimreapers Your F-16 solution looked so logical based on your previous experiments. I think you're on to something that the F-16 is a super interceptor. The modern F-106.
@@grimreapers You know the Israeli failure to intercept the MiG-25 back in the 1970's with F-4's would be real interesting to see. Then try it with an F-15A, then one of your optimized F-16A armed as if they were in the day.
So there was an interceptor version of the Sr-71 which had a weird asymmetrical load of I believe Phoenix missiles.
I thought it would be neat to see a bomber version for either SEAD, high priority targets or even political assassinations. It would carry a pair of modified RIM-66's for ground attack from extreme altitude. I believe late 70's RIMs had inertial guidance and terminal infrared homing.
I know it's full of holes but it's interesting to think about.
It wasn't the Phoenix
That's a great idea.
I want to see SR-71 interceptor versus the UFOs from Iron Skies.
YF-12A had three Aim-47s I believe
Very cool
Needed an EE Lightning ;) Would have thought it would have been better to try and paint the sr-71 from below rather than on same plain.
Time to altitude record 35.000 m (115.000ft) in 4 min. 11.78 sec. MiG-31. Basically it can shoot it from above... Two rockets and clean configuration won't slow it much.
MiG-25 can't accelerate in the dense layers of the atmosphere, it doesn't work there.
you want to climb with the F-15 staying above mach 2. You can cruise around at 65000 ft and m1.8
In real life they'd have drop tanks and likely AIM9's and 120s on the wings, which would make the numbers you mention absolutely absurdly impossible lol. Even with just 120's I don't think they could achieve that.
Was watching this on stream!
Edit: how many top secret programs is the us is working on right know that the public doesn't know, like Sr 71 and Yf 12 back in the 60s
This is the 2nd video I have watched thus far, and they are awesome to see the what if factor. I have to ask, does this sim/ game yet you experience G-LOC? I only ask because you had to be pulling 9.5g's to get to a decent altitude in the 1st aircraft vs. the SR-71. Damn, that plane was magnificent while it was in service.
i would like to see the black bird going super low and fast and flying at all the SAMs you used in this video
That would be a pretty good video what would be the range of the low altitude
The black bird is actually pretty slow at low altitude
@@_flyingcat_7527 really?????
Im wondering can the Su-57 or Su-75 or Su-41 intercept the blackbird at high alt. Using the new hypersonic missle
@@calvinringo3886 apparently the ramjet engines only really do their thing at high altitude, idk check the other vid GR did i think he mentioned it
I wonder about the English Electric Lightening being able to intercept the SR-71
Thinking the same thing, after all it did an exercise intercept of the U2 back in the 80's
Seems sketchy tbh
The missiles it carried wouldn’t have got the job done.. getting up there is one thing but if you don’t have the weapons to bring it down it’s only for lols
It would work but ONLY with proper nav guidance from a ground radar operator.
you would want an ICBM multi stage warhead with some decent anti aircraft missiles in the final stage, it could be done, it'd be expensive af tho
Thanks Cap!!
F104 went up to 110000+ feet world record in the 1960's.
the blackbird is the new carrier group
agree
Viggens did it often. Fly up lock on and fly down. As the pilots called it "just reminding them we are here"
How about:
1: F-14 except it matches course with the blackbird so the Cat is mach 2+ as the BB passes overhead for a Phoenix shot
2: intercept blackbird with....blackbird. YF-12 as the interceptor against an SR-71 on a recon run.
I read somewhere that thousands of SAM we're fired against the Blackbird in the cold war, not a single one succeded, even the few missiles with the range and speed to reach it only had a very little "window" to perform an attack with any chance of inpact, american pilots of course had a marked interest on make the task even more difficult.
the flaw in this test is they are attempting to fly head to head with an SR71 . . its nearly impossible to take this approach attempting to get the speed and alt all while you are closing in on each other. you should make another video where you attempt to intercept coming from the side.. which is much more realistic
I tried making turns to chase it down from behind. I even started the turn when it was 15 miles off the nose. by the time I was turned around the aircraft was already over the airport we had started from.
During Desert Storm we tracked one of these on the USS Sterett and it was insane. ..however there was a fellow CG that shot down a satelite with an SM-2ER which maaaaay have been able to shoot it down CG-47 class didn't have the ER birds
Its inanse how something like the black bird came from its time despite being ahead of it. Actually have seen one of these in person, theres one of few on display near Witchita Kansas. & I always gotta stop by that museum at least once when I go up visit family
It is hilarious hearing somebody not to have power in "Foxbat" :) The real beast can be accelerated right to thermal destruction like SR-71. Its engines are "cheap" solution to high altitude thrust and efficiency. J-58 are two-cycle engine (turbojet/ ramjet), R-15 is a "turboramjet" where the compressor/ turbine core have rather low compression and are inefficient subsonically, but it can get a lot of ram pressure and pass it to the afterburner.
Meh, not really - the SR-71 had no "thermal destruction" events, thank you very much lol. The 25 and 31 (and every Russian fighter) have engines which are dramatically inferior in both efficiency, reliability, and engineering - specifically exotic materials and heat tolerances. The SR-71 could cruise at M3.2 all day long with enough fuel to land, offload film, and take off again.
The MIG 25/31 could ATTEMPT a short (~15-20 minute) intercept at top speeds, fail to even approach launch range, and land with engines which required a COMPLETE overhaul or scrapping. Many times there would be fuselage and paint damage as well.
You saying "like the SR-71" is kinda ridiculous to be honest, there was nothing similar about them. It was a walk in the park for the SR-71, and a near-death futile experience in the 25/31.
@@EstorilEm There is one major difference between two of us, and that is I can also read Russian quite well. There was no damage to MiG-25R engines that flew over Sinai at M3+. They were replaced to investigate if work outside the envelope on pre-series but operational aircraft produced any damage. There were none (and it is from the interview with the chief designer).
Also, to intercept something, one does not need superior performance but superior digital GCI guidance (guess what, both MiG-25P and JA-37 Viggen had those) and a targeting computer that calculates PK and does not change radar modes when it releases the trigger. If it is IR shot, it is completely EW silent. If it is Radar missile, CW illuminators on the wingtips work on completely different frequency and are activated upon launch.
Also, production of MiG-25 is over 500 units. What is the total number of A-12s, SR-71s and YF-12s built?
@@docnele Uhm, who cares what the production number was? The SR-71s achieved a mission which no other aircraft did - they didn't NEED hundreds of them, and set world records which still stand to this day.
The MiG-25 did.... absolutely nothing, and was a complete waste of money. It couldn't turn, had zero range, and was obsolete (as a fighter/interceptor) the moment it took flight, compared to its contemporaries. It was a perfect example of the US scaring the USSR into wasting money on something completely pointless.
Also I don't really care if you can read Russian or not, their engines today are about 20 years behind the Brits and US in materials / pressures, back then they absolutely melted at M3+ and you know it, as did parts of the fuselage. The aircraft also had an endurance of MINUTES at that speed.
Which brings me to my next point, an intercept was always going to be futile. Even with modern computers, you'd have to have the aircraft on the runway running and ready to take off with a perfect intercept calculation to even remotely have a chance of missile launch. Of course this is ridiculous - they may have had an idea where the SR-71s were going, but having an air strip directly in its path PRE WARNED over a hundred miles out just wasn't going to happen.
Hence the stories of MiG-25's just stalling out and falling away as the little speck of the SR-71 flies by. Actually I take that back, there's no way anyone got close enough to even see it.
@@EstorilEm We agree to disagree...I read interviews and reports with designers and MiG-25 pilots, one is available on RUclips, but I guess you want to live in your belief... I know that even some former SR-71 pilots still think they were "untouchable" ;)
I think an Eurofighter with the new Meteor missile could do it
agree
I love it when GR Zimba is the Test pilot chosen! 😂
My choice would be an F-14 Tomcat with the AIM-54C Phoenix missile. With the Tomcat at over Mach 2 and the Phoenix at 100,000 feet and above Mach 5, this would be the best combination to bring down the SR-71. All other air-to-air combinations would have a very difficult time of achieving the speed and altitude necessary to bring down the SR-71.
It’s too bad the CF-105 isn’t in the game. I know it never seen service and they don’t have any data to build a flightmodel from, but it was one fast jet for 1959.
Honestly Mood, I'd love to fly the Arrow In DCS.
Maybe It could have gotten up to Mach 2.7?
@@user-bg4cy9rx4w Not the flying prototype. They had designs for a Mk2 and Mk3 which I think the Mk3 would have been capable of Mach 2.5 and 70,000ft using the Orenda Iroquois engines, but the project was cancelled and all plans destroyed.
@@LokitheSiberian The Mk3 was the one theorized design for Mach 3+ flight as far as I remember. You are talking about the one with the variable geometry spike intakes, right?
i think The Mk2 was probably going to be the one to do high mach 2 numbers since it was the designated service version of the arrow, and the Prototype did almost mach 2 numbers without opening on its performance. I should have probably clarified a bit more on that
We did lose pretty much everything but there is some stuff that was preserved thankfully.
Also, Interestingly enough there is actually two iroquois preserved in differing conditions, One of em is in the possession of S&S Turbines.
That one Could very likely be replicated and actually brought to running condition in the later future for a replica, its being stored right now
Dudes......try flying opposite direction not straight into it. Try and meet it with it flying over and ahead of you. Flying into it you will never be able to turn when it passes you. Plus it will give you much more time to get some speed up
It would easily outrun the missile in a tail chase. Keep in mind the missiles max speed happens not a burnout but once it has already descended from high altitude trading altitude for speed. At 90k ft the missile simply doesn't have enough kinetic energy to keep up, much less intercept . They can barely meet the demands on a head on engagement. The difference here was the E-2 radar and datalink gave the interceptors enough time to get missiles in the air in order to build up the energy needed.
@@mikedelta1441 if they climb to a max ceiling and go to mach 2.0 i dont think the bird will outrun it. They should test my theory
Uh….Aren’t two aircraft traveling head on, actually flying in the opposite direction?
@@bigbore4498 nice play on words but we know his use of "opposite direction" was referring to the direction that we were flying not in reference to two separate objects. lol don't goat him into an argument over that hahahah
Cool idea
Mig-31 full fuel load (internal tank only) is 14,200kg. Could have dumped 10,000kg off that and still had enough to reach intercept. Taking that huge weight burden off it would have been a game changer.
I'd love to see Kortana have a crack at the SR-71.