Mig-25PD as escort fighters

destiple

Banned
Good morning

Consider this a limited nonnuclear war set in the 80s

USSR is attacking command and control centers airbases and navalbases in Japan and lets say turkey in the mid-80s

plan to attack them with ASM and ARM ( AS-6/AS-4 and AS-16) carried by Tu-16/Tu-22 and Tu-95

they need to be escorted to the launching point which is approx 200nm from their targets , that is where they will launch their missiles and then immediately turn back and head home as their missiles have inertial and active radar guidance

that means they need to be protected not for long distances over hostile territory but just to 200nm or so from enemy's bases

The primary threat to these bombers is the interceptors F-15/f-16 AND f-4 which will be scrambled as soon as the soviet bombers are detected likely several hundred miles away from the jap/turkish bases ( due to AWACS).

The bombers are at high altitude accompanied by mig-25s

Now the mig-25s accompanying them will race ahead to meet these fighters head on and this will accomplish 4 things
1-Distract the interceptors from the bombers
2-Draw in fire from their SARH missiles which otherwise could be used against the bombers, since enemy interceptors can only guide one SARH missile at one time ( and foxbats have shown they can be notoriously hard to kill with AIM-7s) this can be quite time consuming giving the bombers time to reach their launch point
3-The foxbats can fire their own missiles which even if they mostly miss will still make the fighters take evasive actions
4-Since bombers are at high altitude this will force the enemy interceptors to fight at higher altitude where foxbats perform better than at low altitude

In the meantime the bombers can reach their launch time, release their missiles and head home

In this way i though foxbats might be quite successful in their goal as escorts, not by destroying large number of enemy interceptors but by keeping them occupied long enough for the bombers to launch their missiles and foxbats may even get a few kills by their slash and dash tactics

what do you guys think ?
 
Regarding the MIG-25, I think they would have to inject the "look-down shoot-down" technology for the escort job to be successful. Also, the engines on the MIG-25 were really thirsty and the metal's (nickel instead of titanium) they used couldn't handle the heat for very long at high speed (mach 2+) so that would mean they can't just jet ahead of the bombers as easily.

In 1969, the USSR changed their bomber attack altitude from high to a low-level approach to avoid radar so you may need to change your premise on how the MIG-25 escorts.

The R-40 missile (the MIG-25's missile) was a semi-active radar type and I think it would be interesting to hear from experts (I am not one) whether that type of missile would be able to attack head-on the US/Allied interceptors.
 
Also, the engines on the MIG-25 were really thirsty

That's my thought. The range is far too low to act as an effective escort, apart from any other considerations. A Backfire has a combat range on the order of 7k KM...the Foxbat has a combat range (no tanks) of around 1700 km. You CAN add drop tanks, but every drop tank is one less missile, and drop tanks will still not get you a high enough range, all other considerations aside.
 

destiple

Banned
^ gentleman we are talking about targets that are 800 km away in japan or turkey no need for the ultra long range
 

destiple

Banned
Regarding the MIG-25, I think they would have to inject the "look-down shoot-down" technology for the escort job to be successful. Also, the engines on the MIG-25 were really thirsty and the metal's (nickel instead of titanium) they used couldn't handle the heat for very long at high speed (mach 2+) so that would mean they can't just jet ahead of the bombers as easily.
good point but atleast they can easily overrtake the AS-4/6 equipped tu-16 and tu-95 , even on subsonic cruise
In 1969, the USSR changed their bomber attack altitude from high to a low-level approach to avoid radar so you may need to change your premise on how the MIG-25 escorts.
True but that does not mean that the cruise missile carriers esp the older ones cannot be a high altitude approach esp when defences are not as sophisticated as NORAD ( e.g japan or turkey)

The R-40 missile (the MIG-25's missile) was a semi-active radar type and I think it would be interesting to hear from experts (I am not one) whether that type of missile would be able to attack head-on the US/Allied interceptors.
I would suspect it was not that great but neither was the AIM-7E of Turkey/japan
esp since they all shared the main limitations of SARH missiles , and only one missile can be guided at a time and any evasive action may result in losing lock on the target
 
Overall, the MIG-25 could be used as an escort and the R-40 is a pretty cool long-range anti-air missile. Honestly though, I believe the USSR planners figured their long-range bomber fleet wasn't going to be escorted and could get to their launch points without intercept simply by going low, then drop their missiles, and turn away for home.
 
USAF didn't adopt the AIM-120 AMRAAM until 1991 (after the 1st Gulf War). The initial versions had a 40km range (thereabouts) while the R-40 was a 80km range weapon (sorta like the F-14's Phoenix but shorter range).

The normal USAF loadout in the 80s was the AIM-9 for IR close-in combat and the AIM-7 Sparrow for Radar combat
 
Destiple wrote:
Consider this a limited nonnuclear war set in the 80s

Ok but that greatly limits your "options" if you actually attack a SEATO or NATO nation specifically...

USSR is attacking command and control centers airbases and naval bases in Japan and let's say turkey in the mid-80s

Unless the US has been kicked out of Japan it's considered an attack on the US with all that entails. Turkey was... difficult but mostly the same. First of all you not only have to deal with the air and naval bases but at least a couple of carrier groups in the mix. This changes things drastically unless you can achieve total, (no warning) surprise.

First of all there's a "set piece" for this that has to be explained.

It's all about the "zone" defense and how it's laid out. Even if Japan and Turkey are 'going-it-alone' (and frankly odds of them doing that are miniscule simply because the USSR CAN overwhelm them no matter how much they might 'hurt' them in return) they will use the NATO/SEATO 'playbook' to make the most of the defense.

First there is the interdiction and detection zone which is as close as possible to the 'threat' vector as you can put it. These are your radar "pickets" designed and placed to get maximum coverage of the threat vector. They detect and pass on tracking data to the 'defensive' forces. Then comes your outer, inner and 'point defense' zones. (The 'higher' the bombers the longer range they can be spotted and tracked)

"Outer" consists of your longer range defensive systems which is this case would be missile armed Navy, air, and ground based platforms able to 'range' on the attackers. Your Aegis ships and long range (F-14/Phoenix) and such. They will NOT engage the escorts. Not their job. Sprinkled into this is a series of shorter range platforms, (Phantoms, F-15/16/18s) that will move to 'spoil' any attempts by the escorts to disrupt the long range platforms. Either by engaging or simply moving between the escorts and the platforms. They MAY fire at the escorts as they have the job of defending the long range platforms but this will not reduce or 'distract' the attack on the bombers.

Once the bombers cross out of range or the defenders have shot all possible targets then the second line of defenders in the zone move to engage. Theses are more of the shorter range platforms but again they will be divided into two groups one of which is dedicated to the bombers the other to fend off the escorts if needed. And this is actually a key point because by the 1980s we KNOW the Mig-25 isn't a very good air-to-air threat and will treat it accordingly. So there will be fewer resources directed towards the escorts and it will be unlikely they will greatly effect the bomber defenders. (To 'threaten' the defenders the escorts have to fire missiles and attempt to engage the targets or they won't react. At which point they become vulnerable to interception and destruction themselves. Note the defenders won't 'come-up' to the Migs the Migs will have to come down to them the defenders are mostly only interested in the bombers)

Then things pass into the Inner defense zone where there are more long range platforms and defenders, again split into groups which the bombers and escorts have to pass through to get to the launch point at least. By this point it is unlikely the escort has any missile left so the only way to disrupt the defenders is to get in close and that's about the worst situation for an interceptor. Interceptors by nature are not good dogfighters and this is where the defenders have all the advantages. IF the bombers get to launch then the defenders switch to missile intercepts and ECM as they cross the rest of the zone.

Then there's the "point defense" or last line of systems the missiles have to cross to hit the target and this includes naval, air and land assets all laid so as to kill as many missiles as possible before they hit. Given the timeframe they may not make many kills but each one counts and degrades the whole strike.

plan to attack them with ASM and ARM ( AS-6/AS-4 and AS-16) carried by Tu-16/Tu-22 and Tu-95

You're biggest non-nuclear warhead is around 1,000kg with the smallest, (and fastest) only having around 150kg so you're talking a LOT of missiles to do any significant damage just FYI. (Bigger warheads, AS-4/6, actually have a higher range than the light AS-16) First of all you have to get past the CAP and missile/aircraft defense system which don't forget will include anti-air Japanese and Turkish ships stationed between the most likely 'threat' and home. Call weapons range anywhere from 74 to over 100 km engagement range from multiple platforms. Then there's the staged-through Naval CAP and land-based Naval CAP which may be deploying Phoenix missiles (190km) which WILL be targeted on the bombers NOT the fighters which is for the Phantoms, F-15s, F-16s and F-18s. Note the defenders have no way of knowing what the incoming warheads are so they will have to assume they are ALL nuclear and try and intercept them all.

they need to be escorted to the launching point which is approx 200nm from their targets , that is where they will launch their missiles and then immediately turn back and head home as their missiles have inertial and active radar guidance

You've got to get a little over half way across the Sea of Japan (Turkey is worse) before you can launch on many targets so you have a problem. You're going to hit the 'outer defense at least 300km out of range to launch and that's NOT the 'air defense perimeter which will be closer. So expect to encounter defensive fighters around 200km short of the 'half-way point'.

that means they need to be protected not for long distances over hostile territory but just to 200nm or so from enemy's bases

Note the defenders want to knock down EVERY possible aircraft very much short of the 'inner' defensive zone which will be half-range of their defensive missile envelope, (call it 100km of the target) and that will include passing into at least a couple 'inner' defensive zones of naval units too.

The primary threat to these bombers is the interceptors F-15/f-16 AND f-4 which will be scrambled as soon as the soviet bombers are detected likely several hundred miles away from the jap/turkish bases ( due to AWACS).

Naval and land units too. Make that detected shortly after they take off unless they hide behind a mountain range or two :) AWACS has an 'Beyond the Horizon" range of around 650km, with the E2C Hawkeye's having about the same range abilities. 190km for "Standard" (no missile pun intended but there it is :) ) Aegis range for tracking and engagement which Japan has but Turkey does not. Yes the 'defenders' will be vectored towards any spotted threat but they will also engage with long range missiles the second they attackers enter range and for most of the bombers, (little chance of an escort being targeted) if they are high they are spotted and dead.

The bombers are at high altitude accompanied by mig-25s

As noted the doctrine change BECAUSE the Allied forces could literally spot the attacks forming up over their airbases so they'd come in low and fast from multiple directions AND the Mig's would be spotted (and tracked first) but would not be enough to 'saturate' the tracking systems. The "long Range" intercept teams will be naval and land based SAMs with a backup of F-14s and some F4s and F15s. F16s and F18s will be taking the mid to short range targets that 'leak' through. Note they Migs may NOT be engaged at all since they are quite obviously NOT attack aircraft and depending on the number they will not be able to overwhelm or significantly 'distract' the defenders even when 'zooming and booming' through the zones. (And they will obviously be time limited AND vulnerable to 'fixed' defensive fire from the naval and land assets)

Note also though the R40 outranges the AIM-7/9 the former is an 'interceptor' missile designed for long range, high speed, low maneuver engagements whereas the latter are "combat" missiles designed to track and engage maneuvering targets at closer range. The R40 can go further but has a higher chance of missing while the AIM-7/9 are meant to maneuver and hit a dodging target which the Mig is NOT going to be. (No air-to-air missile ever knocked down an SR-71 but keep in mind that's because the SR's never came down near enough to 'play' with them either. To properly 'escort' bombers the Mig's would have to)

Now the mig-25s accompanying them will race ahead to meet these fighters head on and this will accomplish 4 things
1-Distract the interceptors from the bombers
2-Draw in fire from their SARH missiles which otherwise could be used against the bombers, since enemy interceptors can only guide one SARH missile at one time ( and foxbats have shown they can be notoriously hard to kill with AIM-7s) this can be quite time consuming giving the bombers time to reach their launch point
3-The foxbats can fire their own missiles which even if they mostly miss will still make the fighters take evasive actions
4-Since bombers are at high altitude this will force the enemy interceptors to fight at higher altitude where foxbats perform better than at low altitude

While racing ahead IS a threat it also means the defenders now can concentrate on two separate engagements and plan accordingly. IF the Mig's can take out a significant number of the defending aircraft the other groups MAY turn to engage but they are there for the bombers and its unlikely once the Mig's fire their missiles they will be a threat at all. Since doctrine is to salvo two missiles from each Mig at each targeted, (one IR one SARH) the Mig's are quickly out of ammo. Whereas the defenders just have to dodge and then get back to tracking in on the bombers.

1) Not going to happen. The defenses are set up for several engagements as I noted above. You're going to get the 'attention' of the outer zone defenders and if you get that far the short range zone. Everybody else will keep their eyes on their own balls and ignore the 'distractions'. Migs are not the 'threat here.
2) Incorrect they will draw SOME SARH's for the most part unless the Mig's are getting really lucky the main job here is to make them expend their missiles, (you may note the similarity here) and render themselves useless. Actual practice was to 'ripple' fire multiple AIM-7s and multiplex the radar to guide both (sometime up to four depending were shot to increase the kill probability but only two could usually be actively guided by the launching aircraft) so to increase the chances of a hit. Also, while each aircraft may only be able to 'run' on SAHR missile in the 80s 'data linking' was already a thing and in fact both the AWACS (E2 and E3) and some of the Aegis and even other aircraft, (F14 and F15 could some Phantom's) could be used to 'run' a missile launched from another aircraft. Not many mind you but on average every plane that did NOT fire a SAHR could light up and run one or more someone else fired to target. As you note Mig-25s can be hard to kill with an AIM-7 but mostly because they do NOT engage and simply run away from the fighter/missile. This assumes they come somewhat within range enough to present a credible 'threat' to the defenders which of course puts them within range of those defenders as well. And while a Mig-25 can 'run' and 'dodge' a couple of AIM-7s if he gets a dozen in the face he's in trouble. (Conversely it's been noted that a Mig-25 hasn't shot down anything like an F-14/15/16/18 and might not get a Phantom either so...)

3) Unless the bombers are right on their launch points this point 'evasive action' is not going to do much and again it won't be the 'bomber interceptors' that are going to be dodging so you really didn't get a lot from shooting off your missiles.

4) If the bombers are at high altitude then they will be seen longer and shot at longer and the defenders have shorter lanes back to rearm and try again and longer to do so since the bombers can be clearly seen and tracked.

In the meantime the bombers can reach their launch time, release their missiles and head home
In this way i though foxbats might be quite successful in their goal as escorts, not by destroying large number of enemy interceptors but by keeping them occupied long enough for the bombers to launch their missiles and foxbats may even get a few kills by their slash and dash tactics

Probably don't want to risk stealing from a master but Tom Clancy actually had this one figured out already :) Yes have the Mig's fly in high and mighty and engage where and if they can. Meanwhile the AS-4/6 ships slip in low and slow to a bit out of maximum range of all the radar going off here. (Wait for it :) ) Meanwhile the Backfires with the AS-16 loiter in two groups on the extreme opposite sides of the combat area and wait. Just before the AS-4/6 groups should get picked up they launch a full salvo of missiles some dialed back to subsonic speeds some to supersonic and all flying 'bomber' profiles into the target area. Turn and run for home at full throttle along with the Mig's. The defenders pick up the 'bombers' coming in as expected and move to engage by zone and by groups. They 'kill' about 90 percent of the "bombers" 'before they 'launch' and the rest go into full defense mode and set up new intercepts to go after the last 10% of the 'bombers' before they can launch. Meanwhile the Backfires move into range still flying slow and low and keeping track of the radar picture as it develops. At some point here one of the defenders is going to get a 'look' at one of these 'bombers' and realize they've been had. Once that occurs the Backfires go to full burn and close to their launch points and salvo the AS-16 at two targets and blanket them with missiles while they turn and burn for home.

You should get about 80% or more of the AS-16 to target this way and lose maybe a couple of Backfires, and some Mig's but the defenders won't be fooled twice so it was your 'shot' here so it better be worth it. (Clancy got a carrier with it)

Further replies:
True but that does not mean that the cruise missile carriers esp the older ones cannot be a high altitude approach esp when defenses are not as sophisticated as NORAD ( e.g japan or turkey)

Unless there IS no 'NATO' then no the defenses won't be less and they will only be spotted and tracked sooner. If Japan and Turkey are for some reason in this 'alone' then that might make sense but not really as either could still track high and slow targets just as easy. Where the 'difference' is low and slow just like NATO/SETO. The entire reason FOR the change in doctrine was to give the missile carriers a least as 'shot' at getting to their launch points no matter who was on the defensive :) And don't' forget you've got to deal with seaborne 'threats' which you are not going to be flying 'over' enough to avoid so it really does no good to fly high.

I would suspect it was not that great but neither was the AIM-7E of Turkey/japan
esp since they all shared the main limitations of SARH missiles , and only one missile can be guided at a time and any evasive action may result in losing lock on the target

Even IF that were so you can have multiple SARH's in flight towards a single target and evading one most likely puts you into the engagement cone of another. But as I noted the 'single SARH per aircraft' wasn't true at the time and hadn't been since the mid-70s. Granted if a single defender fired more than two, (say) the chances were good the 'extras' weren't guided but they COULD be and you literally couldn't tell which was which till it started actively homing on you. Note that the R-40 'standard' firing procedure was to salvo two missiles at each target, one passive infrared and one SARH. The Mig-25 didn't have multiplexing ability so it COULD only work one SARH missile at a time.

Randy
 

destiple

Banned
Thanks Randy for the detailed reply appreciate your input

this question is part of a bigger scenario I'm planning in which
1-japan unilaterally attacks Kurils against US approval so gets no help from them , they have only F-4 and F-15s
2-Turkey attacks Greece ( again against NATO consent ) and USSR briefly intervenes to save the Greeks
so in all this there are no F-14s and no AEGIS equipped vessels as Japan didnt get its first till 1992

Even IF that were so you can have multiple SARH's in flight towards a single target and evading one most likely puts you into the engagement cone of another. But as I noted the 'single SARH per aircraft' wasn't true at the time and hadn't been since the mid-70s. Granted if a single defender fired more than two, (say) the chances were good the 'extras' weren't guided but they COULD be and you literally couldn't tell which was which till it started actively homing on you

but what if the launching aircraft is itself being targeted and has to take evasive action ? can it still guide the SARH missiles ? Only one illuminator on the APG-63, so they can target only one aircraft at a time

Conversely it's been noted that a Mig-25 hasn't shot down anything like an F-14/15/16/18 and might not get a Phantom either so...)
confirmed are 1 x f-18 and 3 x f-4C/E and f-16 got a mig-25 with AMRAAM which is not functional in the 80s

Actual practice was to 'ripple' fire multiple AIM-7s and multiplex the radar to guide both (sometime up to four depending were shot to increase the kill probability but only two could usually be actively guided by the launching aircraft) so to increase the chances of a hit. Also, while each aircraft may only be able to 'run' on SAHR missile in the 80s 'data linking' was already a thing and in fact both the AWACS (E2 and E3) and some of the Aegis and even other aircraft, (F14 and F15 could some Phantom's) could be used to 'run' a missile launched from another aircraft. Not many mind you but on average every plane that did NOT fire a SAHR could light up and run one or more someone else fired to target.
were japanese and turkish pilots trained on these tactics ? has the AIM-7 scored any kills using these methods ?

As you note Mig-25s can be hard to kill with an AIM-7 but mostly because they do NOT engage and simply run away from the fighter/missile. This assumes they come somewhat within range enough to present a credible 'threat' to the defenders which of course puts them within range of those defenders as well
very true but that is the foxbats MO, its not going to stick around for a knife fight and frankly it does not need to as long as it can draw fire away from bombers and live to fight another day

IF the Mig's can take out a significant number of the defending aircraft the other groups MAY turn to engage but they are there for the bombers and its unlikely once the Mig's fire their missiles they will be a threat at all. Since doctrine is to salvo two missiles from each Mig at each targeted, (one IR one SARH) the Mig's are quickly out of ammo. Whereas the defenders just have to dodge and then get back to tracking in on the bombers.

valid point, that is why probably the foxbats best chance is to
1-delay the engagement with interceptors as long as possible
2- this tactic will only work for short distance sorties ( < 1000 km)
3-The foxbats and bombers may need to be accompanied by a lot of jammer aircraft to confuse the defenders

You're biggest non-nuclear warhead is around 1,000kg with the smallest, (and fastest) only having around 150kg so you're talking a LOT of missiles to do any significant damage just FYI.
Indeed I figured if half strategic aviation is involved ( and not the AV-mF bombers) then in 1989 they can field 200-250 bear/badger/backfire so approx 300-400 missiles depending on the range.That will likely be most beneficial if targeted against their opponents primary naval bases crippling a lot of their ships in port

You've got to get a little over half way across the Sea of Japan (Turkey is worse) before you can launch on many targets so you have a problem. You're going to hit the 'outer defense at least 300km out of range to launch and that's NOT the 'air defense perimeter which will be closer. So expect to encounter defensive fighters around 200km short of the 'half-way point'

I'm not sure if I follow
its approx 1000km from vladivastock to tokyo
most turkish naval bases are on the western side so I'm assuming Strategic aviation assets will be based in bulgaria that puts it 550 km from sofia to constantinople even if we double it thats 1100 km

So there will be fewer resources directed towards the escorts and it will be unlikely they will greatly effect the bomber defenders.
tr
ue but only if the defenders have sufficent fighters
(To 'threaten' the defenders the escorts have to fire missiles and attempt to engage the targets or they won't react. At which point they become vulnerable to interception and destruction themselves.

again true
Note the defenders won't 'come-up' to the Migs the Migs will have to come down to them the defenders are mostly only interested in the bombers)
if the flight profile of bombers is at high level then the interceptors will not be able to enagage them w/o coming up close to their level
 
Last edited:
Escort fighter is always a good idea. Ideally, it will go on 'freijagd' while flying slow enough in order to mimick the bombers, with them flying the airborne jammers, and just behind them the EAW (1st Moss, them Mainstay), with bombers flying in next on different altitudes. If attacker manages to scramble the fighters - okay, this is why the escorts are there, after the air combat(s) the bombers will have an easier way in. If fighters are not scrambled - even better.
 
Top