4 ms·

> At the high altitudes and speeds the Blackbird would have to go to evade a MiG-25, it would have no hope at all of evading a missile. I thought the SR-71 was

> At the high altitudes and speeds the Blackbird would have to go to evade a MiG-25, it would have no hope at all of evading a missile. I thought the SR-71 was faster than missiles? https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/forget-stealth%E2%80%94-sr-71-blackbird-could-simply-outrun-missiles-120021 https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/forget-stealth%E2%80%...

zip1234 4y ago
Missiles are faster but start in a far disadvantaged position. The missile has to start from 0 speed and 0 altitude. By the time the missile is at speed and altitude, it is too late given the speed of the SR-71.
- sudosysgen 4y ago
  SAMs have to start at 0 speed and 0 altitude. An R-40 launched from a MiG-25 would start at Mach 3+ and 30km altitude.
rtkwe 4y ago
From your own article: > In effect, by the time it took a SAM system could lock onto an SR-71 traveling at Mach 3 and launch a missile, the Blackbird was already moving beyond the effective range of the missile. It wasn't purely faster than the missiles, it was fast enough to get out of range of radar and tracking for ground based missiles and beyond the effective range of the missile before it could reach the jet. Fired from an already moving jet at altitude missiles would have a longer effective range as it would spend less fuel getting to speed and gaining altitude.
sudosysgen 4y ago
It was too fast for surface-to-air missiles, because by the time they got to it's altitude and caught up, they would have lost most of their kinetic energy. Of course, modern SAMs would be able to hit it. The Soviet Union at the time had the R-40 series of air-to-air missiles, that could got Mach 4.5 at very high altitudes if launched by a fast enough, high altitude aircraft, which is much higher than the Mach 3.4 the SR-71 could hope to achieve. The reason it could go that fast is because it didn't have to expend its kinetic energy to climb much, and because it already started up at Mach 3.

zip1234 4y ago

Missiles are faster but start in a far disadvantaged position. The missile has to start from 0 speed and 0 altitude. By the time the missile is at speed and altitude, it is too late given the speed of the SR-71.

sudosysgen 4y ago
SAMs have to start at 0 speed and 0 altitude. An R-40 launched from a MiG-25 would start at Mach 3+ and 30km altitude.

rtkwe 4y ago

From your own article: > In effect, by the time it took a SAM system could lock onto an SR-71 traveling at Mach 3 and launch a missile, the Blackbird was already moving beyond the effective range of the missile. It wasn't purely faster than the missiles, it was fast enough to get out of range of radar and tracking for ground based missiles and beyond the effective range of the missile before it could reach the jet. Fired from an already moving jet at altitude missiles would have a longer effective range as it would spend less fuel getting to speed and gaining altitude.

sudosysgen 4y ago

It was too fast for surface-to-air missiles, because by the time they got to it's altitude and caught up, they would have lost most of their kinetic energy. Of course, modern SAMs would be able to hit it. The Soviet Union at the time had the R-40 series of air-to-air missiles, that could got Mach 4.5 at very high altitudes if launched by a fast enough, high altitude aircraft, which is much higher than the Mach 3.4 the SR-71 could hope to achieve. The reason it could go that fast is because it didn't have to expend its kinetic energy to climb much, and because it already started up at Mach 3.