Speed of the F-16 versus other aircraft

Unread postPosted: 29 Jan 2004, 16:15
by habu2
Well to be honest an F-16 isn't all that fast. Top speed was not a design criteria. I'm going from memory here but IIRC the inlet design limits the jet to a theoretical M2.5 but the canopy has not been tested/rated over M2.05. Someone can correct me here IIRI.

I'd have to check but, with the SR-71 retired, the fastest air-breathing platform (in the white world) is probably the MiG-31.

Unread postPosted: 29 Jan 2004, 17:06
by elp
Really? Are all the Recce versions of the MiG-25 out of service? Which is faster? Recce MiG-25 or MiG-31? Also how fast could the MiG-31 be with A2A weps on it?

Unread postPosted: 29 Jan 2004, 19:54
by Phoenix
Well, a MiG-25 was recorded at Mach 3 and given the similarities between the Foxbat and the Foxhound, you never know.

Unread postPosted: 29 Jan 2004, 20:01
by habu2
I thought the -31 *was* the recce version of the -25 interceptor? Don't really know much about the 25/31 series...

I once worked with a guy who used to work for Hughes - in 1976 he got a call to go get on an airplane, destination unspecified. He was a radar guy at Hughes, and they whisked him off to Japan to inspect the radar on Vic Belenko's MiG-25 before the defection was made public.

Unread postPosted: 30 Jan 2004, 14:42
by Houston

MiG-25

Unread postPosted: 30 Jan 2004, 19:57
by Wildcat
The MiG-25 is still in service, at least in India. The MiG-31 is a modernized version of the MiG-25P (interceptor), with two crews instead of one and a much potent avionics. The recce versions of the Foxbat are, as far as I know, MiG-25R, RB, RBV and RBT. Officially, the recce Foxbats can reach 3000 kph (Mach2.83). However, I read some things stating they actually operate at faster speeds, and I know for sure that Pakistani fighters are still unable to intercept them.

Re: MiG-25

Unread postPosted: 30 Jan 2004, 20:03
by Phoenix
Wildcat wrote:The MiG-25 is still in service, at least in India. The MiG-31 is a modernized version of the MiG-25P (interceptor), with two crews instead of one and a much potent avionics.


I would argue that particular bit. The initial MiG-31 design was nothing like the Mig-25. At a point, it was even, invisioned as a tailless delta. Once practical issues prevailed, the MiG-31 ended up a lot like the MiG-25. And even their initial roles were quite different.
Whereas the MiG-25 was designed to counter the B-70, the MiG-31 was intended to shoot down low flying aircraft and cruise missiles.
I'll stop now coz I'm straying off-topic. :roll:

Thanks to Pjoenix

Unread postPosted: 30 Jan 2004, 20:07
by Wildcat
You're absolutely right: I wrote "modernized" to put it short, but the MiG-31 is a really great improvement over the original MiG-25 design. Only the basic configuration was kept.

Unread postPosted: 30 Jan 2004, 20:51
by Habu
The MiG did actually make it Mach 3 once, but it was a zoom speed, for a short period of time, and it utterly destroyed the engines. The real world limiting factor in the Blackbird's top speed was CIT. Compressor Inlet Temperature....max allowed was 427C. Depending on temp devs and air conditions, you could go past 3.5 Mach (which was done many times) without breaking a sweat. But as that CIT climbed up to 427, you'd start to sweat a bit. Not too shabby for an engine that sucks in 800F air to cool itself off! I can imagine what it did to the Klimovs.

Unread postPosted: 30 Jan 2004, 21:43
by Phoenix
I heard they couldn't use the plane after that. :lol:

Unread postPosted: 30 Jan 2004, 21:55
by kmceject
The MiG-25 engines couldn't handle Mach 3.2 without suffering damage. The Blackbird family was in a class by itself of aircraft that could maintain those speeds for extended time, and repeatably.

Kevin
The Ejection Site

Unread postPosted: 30 Jan 2004, 21:59
by KarimAbdoun
An F-16 Jet could reach a maximum speed of Mach 2.05 making it one of the fastest jets in the World.

As for the MiG-25 reece versions They are still in service, see Air Forces Monthly magazine issue no.181 of April 2003, it shows a MiG-25RBSh Foxbat-D landing with Shuts deployed to slow down the craft, also the Russian Air Force has decided to modernise the -31 interceptors for furthur years of front line service

Unread postPosted: 30 Jan 2004, 23:00
by Habu
Phoenix wrote:I heard they couldn't use the plane after that. :lol:


Dunno about the airframe, but certainly not the engines, they were torn apart by the heat and stress. The fact that the Blackbirds could do this routinely, and with aplomb is a feat that will never be replicated in a convential aircraft. I know, never say never..... Given enough development time and money, I'm sure we could up with something in the future....in the future....the Blackbirds did this 40 YEARS AGO! :shock:

Unread postPosted: 31 Jan 2004, 16:55
by habu2
I pulled these #s out of a survey book on "interceptor" aircraft. I'm sure many may quibble about the exact numbers or configuration etc. My point earlier is that the F-16 wasn't built for speed. M2 is fast but is isn't the fastest, or even one of the fastest.
  • SR-71A - M3.5+
  • MiG-25 - M2.83
  • F-15C - M2.5+
  • MIG-23 - M2.35
  • F-14A - M2.34
  • Mirage 2000 - M2.3+
  • BAe Lightning - M2.27
  • F-4E - M2.25
  • F-4B - M2.25
  • MIG-29A - M2.23
  • F-104S - M2.2
  • Mirage IIIE - M2.2
  • Tornado - M2.2
  • F-4D - M2.16
  • MIG-21MF - M2.1
  • SU-15/21 - M2.1
  • JA-37 - M2.1
  • Mirage F1 - M2.2
  • F-16C - M2.05
  • F/A-18A - M1.8

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2004, 09:34
by sparrow187
There are I believe 2 jets ( F-16's) at edwards that run chase for the F-22 that are referred to as go-fast jets. They have completely different engines in them for the sole purpose of keeping up with the F-22.

By the way, the F-22 can cruise, without the use of aterburners, in excess of mach 1.5. love that supercruise technology.

Unread postPosted: 06 Jul 2004, 17:30
by Milhouse
sparrow187 wrote:There are I belive 2 jets ( F-16's) at edwards that run chase for the f-22 that are referred to as go-fast jets. They have completely different engines in them for the sole purpose of keeping up with the f-22.
Don't know about that but a standard bk 30 from Springfield Oh ANG was sent as a chase for the F-22.

Unread postPosted: 07 Nov 2004, 20:04
by RyanCollins
I heard about the recon version of MiG-25. I think that plane reached
M3.2 or M3.3, not sure... If somebody knows, please notify...

Unread postPosted: 07 Nov 2004, 22:22
by calhoun
Milhouse wrote:
sparrow187 wrote:There are I belive 2 jets ( F-16's) at edwards that run chase for the f-22 that are referred to as go-fast jets. They have completely different engines in them for the sole purpose of keeping up with the f-22.
Don't know about that but a standard bk 30 from Springfield Oh ANG was sent as a chase for the F-22.

A block 30 would be VERY hard pressed to keep up

Unread postPosted: 07 Nov 2004, 23:31
by Delta
I'm curious to see what Mach numbers Viper pilots on here have seen.

Unread postPosted: 15 Nov 2004, 13:07
by RSAF-G2
I've seen 1.9, clean jet at FL32, full AFB

Unread postPosted: 15 Nov 2004, 14:27
by STBYGAIN
That's got me beat, I've only seen 1.4, up near FL500. I see between 1.0 and 1.1 almost every air-air flight. I have 'supercruised' for a good five minutes or so though, although it's supposed to be more than my 1.02 to really qualify.

Unread postPosted: 16 Nov 2004, 02:00
by Cylon
1.94 @ 22K (successful over-speed of centerline tank I might add).

Cylon

Unread postPosted: 16 Nov 2004, 20:47
by elp
Cylon wrote:1.94 @ 22K (successful over-speed of centerline tank I might add).

Cylon



:shock:

Unread postPosted: 17 Nov 2004, 08:32
by Pat1
The X-15 achieved speeds over mach 6, but don't think it is "air-breathing". Today the X-43 (ramjet) achieved a speed of almost mach 10 though it is un-manned.

Unread postPosted: 17 Nov 2004, 23:17
by RyanCollins
What was the max speed of the XB-70 Valkyrie?

Unread postPosted: 18 Nov 2004, 01:17
by habu2
Top recorded speed for the Valkyrie was 2020 MPH at 72,000 ft on 12 Jan 1966 by AV2, crew White & Cotton, equivalent Mach was M3.06. Achieved 4 minutes of M3.0+ time on this flight.

Top recorded Mach for the Valkyrie was M3.08 at 72,800 ft on 12 April 1966 by AV2, crew White & Cotton, equivalent speed was 2000 MPH. Achieved 20 minutes of M3.0+ time on this flight.

Together both XB-70s flew only 129 times, and spent 1 hr 43 min at or over M3.0.

I don't know why, but all my reference books on the flight records for the Valkyrie list top speeds in MPH, not knots. :roll:

Unread postPosted: 18 Nov 2004, 02:39
by Pat1
Here is a link to another list
http://www.globalaircraft.org/top50.htm
I find the Apollo 10 and Helios coments the most curious :shock:

Unread postPosted: 20 Nov 2004, 22:55
by RyanCollins
I got this information for the YE-266 (MiG-25 Foxbat-A), who broke the speed record for a fighter jet:

Type: Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-25 "Foxbat-A" single-seat interceptor.
Engines: two 27,010-lb (12,250-kg) reheated thrust Tumanskii R-31 turbojets.
Performance: maximum speed 2,115 mph (3,404 km/h) or Mach 3.2 at 36,090 ft (11,000 m); initial climb rate 41,010 ft (12,500 m) per minute; Service ceiling 80,05011 (24,400 m); radius 702 miles (1,130 km).
Weights: empty 44,092 lb (20,000 kg); maximum take-off 37,425 lb (17,011 kg).

Unread postPosted: 21 Nov 2004, 04:40
by Eagle
"the Helios satellite obriting the sun travels at Mach 227.3. "


That is total BS. It travels at Mach 0. You cannot have a Mach number without an atmosphere. Of course we all know that. I don't think the Raptor can be outrun by the superbug either.

Unread postPosted: 21 Nov 2004, 07:06
by Pat1
I think they just refer to some avarage speed (or max?, since the article is about max speeds) measured relative to the sun (as if you are viewing it from its surface) and then compare it to an avarge value of speed of sound in our atmosphere. I suppose the sun since its the object it is orbiting...

Unread postPosted: 21 Nov 2004, 19:44
by habu2
Eagle of course is correct, but if you are a PR puke writing a byline then M 227.3 is a helluva lot more impressive than M 0...

By that same (lack of) reasoning, we are all orbiting the sun at about M 90 right now... ;)

Unread postPosted: 21 Nov 2004, 20:05
by RyanCollins
I got this list from a web page (includes rocket planes, like X-15):

1. X-15 Mach 6.72 354,200 feet
2. SR-71 Blackbird (YF-12) Mach 3.2+ 85,000+ feet
3. MiG-25 Foxbat-A (Ye-266) Mach 3.2 123,524 feet
3. X-2 Mach 3.2 126,200 feet
4. XB-70 Valkyrie Mach 3.1 77,350 feet
5. MiG-31 Foxhound Mach 2.83 67,600 feet
6. MiG-25 Foxbat (Ye-155) Mach 2.8 118,900 feet
7. F-15 Eagle Mach 2.5 60,000 feet
7. F-111 Aardvark Mach 2.5 60,000+ feet
8. X-1 Mach 2.435 90,440 feet
9. Su-24 Fencer Mach 2.4 57,400 feet
10. Tu-144 Charger Mach 2.35 59,055 feet
10. MiG-23 Flogger Mach 2.35 60,700 feet
10. Su-27 Flanker Mach 2.35 59,055 feet
11. F-14A Tomcat Mach 2.34 58,000+ feet
12. F-106 Delta Dart Mach 2.31 57,000 feet
13. IAI Kfir Mach 2.3 75,000 feet
13. English Electric Lightning Mach 2.3 60,000 feet
13. MiG-29 Fulcrum Mach 2.3 59,060 feet
13. F-107 Ultra Sabre Mach 2.3 48,000 feet
14. Tornado ADV Mach 2.2 69,997 feet
14. F-4 Phantom Mach 2.2 62,250 feet
14. Mirage 2000 Mach 2.2 59,055 feet
14. F-104 Starfighter Mach 2.2 58,000 feet
(120,800 feet NF-104A)
14. B-58 Hustler Mach 2.2 64,800 feet
15. F-105 Thunderchief Mach 2.1 52,000 feet
15. A-5 Vigilante Mach 2.1 52,100 feet
16. Su-22 Mach 2.09 59,055 feet
17. Tu-160 Blackjack Mach 2.05 49,200 feet
17. MiG-21 Fishbed Mach 2.05 50,000 feet
17. Concorde Mach 2.05 60,000 feet
18. D558-2 Skystreak Mach 2.005 83,235 feet
19. YF-23 Black Widow II Mach 2 (AB) 65,000 feet
19. F-20 Tigershark Mach 2+ 55,000 feet
19. YF-17 Cobra Mach 2+ 50,000 feet
20. Saab JAS 39 Gripen Mach 2 50,000 feet
20. F-16 Fighting Falcon Mach 2 50,000+ feet
20. Saab 37 Viggen Mach 2 60,039 feet
20. Saab 35 Draken Mach 2 65,600 feet
21. Tu-22M Backfire Mach 1.88 43,635 feet
21. F-14B/D Tomcat Mach 1.88 53,000+ feet
22. Su-34 Mach 1.8 45,890 feet
22. F/A-18E/F Super Hornet Mach 1.8 50,000+ feet
22. F-22 Raptor Mach 1.8 (AB) 50,000 feet
23. XF-104 Starfighter Mach 1.79 58,000 feet
24. F-8 Crusader Mach 1.72 58,000 feet
25. F-101B Voodoo Mach 1.66 52,100 feet
26. X-29 FSW Mach 1.6 50,000 feet
27. Tu-22 Blinder Mach 1.52 48,228 feet
27. XF8U-1 Crusader Mach 1.52 58,000 feet
28. SEPECAT Jaguar Mach 1.5 45,930 feet
29. F-5 Freedom Fighter Mach 1.4 50,700 feet
30. F-100 Super Sabre Mach 1.3 51,000 feet
31. X-31 EFMI Mach 1.28 40,000 feet
32. B-1b Lancer Mach 1.25 50,000+ feet
33. F-102 Delta Dagger Mach 1.23 55,000 feet
34. T-38 Talon Mach 1.22 55,000+ feet
35. XF-90 Mach 1.1 39,000 feet
36. MiG-17 Fresco Mach 1.05 52,366 feet
37. F-86 Sabre Mach 1.04 50,800 feet
38. F-117 Nighthawk High Subsonic 45,000 feet
39. AV-8B Harrier II Mach 0.98 41,700+ feet
40. F-94 Starfire Mach 0.97 51,800 feet
41. A-6 Intruder Mach 0.94 42,400 feet
42. Saab 32 Lansen Mach 0.93 52,500 feet
43. F-80 Shooting Star Mach 0.88 46,800 feet
44. BAe Nimrod 2000 Mach 0.87 42,000 feet
45. B-52 Stratofortress Mach 0.86 55,000 feet
46. U-2 Dragon Lady Mach 0.8 90,000 feet
47. C-5 Galaxy Mach 0.79 35,750 feet
48. C-141 Starlifter Mach 0.77 41,600 feet
48. C-17 Globemaster III Mach 0.77 45,000 feet
49. B-2 Spirit Mach 0.72 50,000+ feet
49. P-3 Orion Mach 0.72 28,300 feet
50. A-10 Thunderbolt II Mach 0.67 45,000 feet


the F-16 is in 20, with the saab 39, 37 and 35 with M.2

Unread postPosted: 30 Nov 2004, 17:59
by PetervanStigt
Don't we all agree that in the '70s the F-16 was first and foremost designed with maneuvrability in mind, not top speed... The X-15 isn't breathing air, the X-43 indeed is. But what's the value of M10 in a tactical situation? I heard that a Viper is only able to do M2 clean at 50,000 ft. :lol:

Unread postPosted: 11 Dec 2004, 21:51
by maximillian
habu2 wrote:
  • MiG-25 - M2.83
  • F-15C - M2.5+
  • MIG-23 - M2.35
  • F-14A - M2.34


I agree, everything I've read, and studied, including Belenko's book, and "everything I could lay my hands on about the Blackbirds" in the last 20+ years, suggests the MIG-25 is more of a mach 2.8 class aircraft, than a truley mach-3 class machine, let alone sustained mach-3 plus, plus.

The Syrian/Soviet Pilots who overflew Isreal in MIG-25s at 2000mph, "were very lucky to get back alive," to paraphrase Blenenko himself.

The single seat CIA version A12 Blackbird is speculated (educated sources) to have been even a little faster, and had higher cruise altitude capability than even the SR-71.

It's important also to recognise that 1 v 1 in a visual domain dogfight,
the Mig-25 is absolutely dead meat against an F-16, Duh !

There's conflicting opninion these days as to the importance of "speed and performance," in contrast to "capability."

This might just be what this thread is trying to establish.

A good example is the F-18E, wich is pruported to be essentialy subsonic, for most practical purposes, and yet the navy claims it's extranordinary
"capability" makes up for this.

Personely, I don't buy it.

I think the navy made a significant mistake in not developing a subsiquently
re-designed, upgraded, and advanced version of the F-14, wich would have afforded BOTH, "Capabiity" and "Performance" instead of the so-called "super hornet." A case where bussiness interests, and Polictics overruled the best interests of national defence.

I think that the F-16 is a very good compromise, with supersonic performance on tap, and all kinds of "capabilities." As are the F-15s, and thank God there still with us.
MaX

Unread postPosted: 11 Dec 2004, 23:32
by PetervanStigt
hear hear... The only advantage of excess power and great speed is that you can get high fast, gaining an advantage in an A/A situation and ingress/eggress on your own in initiative

Unread postPosted: 17 Dec 2004, 03:51
by fifel144
I've seen clean blk 25 w/220e do 1.95 at 38k on FCF on regular basis and 1.2 at 1200AGL W/2 370's, but caused an overtemp.