What if the MiG-25 was made of titanium?

It absolutely isn't. It takes several years to make a BTR CDR. 2 to make a fighter pilot.
You and others are falling into the Clancy style trap of denigrating Soviet equipment without understanding their doctrine. And you don't understand their doctrine since you don't understand their circumstances.
The Soviets had to defend a country with the longest borders in the world surrounded by enemies. The US....didn't. The Foxbat was meant for the interceptor role. It needs to be able to dash, to be able to fix any mistake in the setup and timing of the intercept, otherwise you miss and the bomber happily flies to its target.
The MiG-25 was designed when the threat to them seemed to be coming from supersonic bombers which greatly reduced earlier aircraft's engagement and engagement envelopes.

I understand their circumstances perfectly well, however the circumstances I focus on is the level of technological development since that drives what doctrine is possible. The Soviets may as well wish for the moon as wish for a more sophisticated Mig25 able to do more amazing shit and then developing doctrine to fit. They're stuck with their relative economic poverty and level of technical development that means that they simply cannot develop advanced multi-role aircraft and take advantage of the doctrinal opportunities that presents, assuming of course that the Soviet political system allows them such freedom of action, which it didn't. That's not to say the Soviets couldn't do stuff and use it effectively, they could and did, but lets not pretend that was because they were all round awesome.

Oh and with pilots NATO considered 180 flight hours per year to be needed to retain a C rating, an A rating required 250, the Soviets in the latter half of the Cold War were doing 70 hours per year. Granted their accounting methods were a bit stricter which maybe gives them another 10-15 hours by NATO standards. A SAM battery commander is a fraction of the cost, easier to recruit and train and keep proficient compared to a fighter pilot.
 

Anderman

Donor
Yes, it includes the Alphajets. No, it doesn't include the Marineflieger Tornadoes.

The numbers i remember are

Tornados 359 (212+35(ECR)+112)
RF-4E 88
F-4F 175
F-4E 10 (in the USA for training)
Alpha Jet 175

Total 807

the delivery of the Tornado ECR started after 1990 iirc
 
There is a lot of Mig 25 bashing, but it held its own even against technologically superior aircraft during desert storm. In short, I think speed made a big difference (making it harder for air to air missiles to hit) and russian made missiles proving quite capable. Ironically, I think speed is about the only thing going for it, but it proved to help it hit way above its weight. I'm surprised this has not shifted air doctrine, as it gave a much inferior aircraft parity with "superior" and far more expensive western designs.
 
There is a lot of Mig 25 bashing, but it held its own even against technologically superior aircraft during desert storm. In short, I think speed made a big difference (making it harder for air to air missiles to hit) and russian made missiles proving quite capable. Ironically, I think speed is about the only thing going for it, but it proved to help it hit way above its weight. I'm surprised this has not shifted air doctrine, as it gave a much inferior aircraft parity with "superior" and far more expensive western designs.

100%, the speed made it special and put it outside the realm of 'normal' performance that normal weapons and tactics are designed to defeat.

I recently saw that throughout the entire Vietnam war not 1 second of air to air combat was undertaken at mach 1.8 or above, the fastest was a couple of seconds at mach 1.6, a few tens of seconds were supersonic and hours were subsonic. The Mig 25s mach 2.6+/70,000'+ performance requires a lot of energy that many fighter-missile combinations don't have.
 
There is a lot of Mig 25 bashing, but it held its own even against technologically superior aircraft during desert storm. In short, I think speed made a big difference (making it harder for air to air missiles to hit) and russian made missiles proving quite capable. Ironically, I think speed is about the only thing going for it, but it proved to help it hit way above its weight. I'm surprised this has not shifted air doctrine, as it gave a much inferior aircraft parity with "superior" and far more expensive western designs.

The only times they were shot down in the Gulf War was when their pilots stupidly tried to turn with Eagles. IIRC one Foxbat outran all the missiles fired at it. So the question is, if all you need is to fly at Mach 2.8 instead of 3.2, does it need to be made of steel or would aluminum alloys do? The Super Crusader is said to be capable of Mach 2.9. The limiting factor being it’s canopy which would darken at that speed.
 
I think that between mach 2.5 and say 2.8 can be handled with strategic use of steel for wing leading edges etc. with the rest being conventional aluminium etc.
 
The only times they were shot down in the Gulf War was when their pilots stupidly tried to turn with Eagles. IIRC one Foxbat outran all the missiles fired at it. So the question is, if all you need is to fly at Mach 2.8 instead of 3.2, does it need to be made of steel or would aluminum alloys do? The Super Crusader is said to be capable of Mach 2.9. The limiting factor being it’s canopy which would darken at that speed.
Both Iraqi mig25 shot by eagles in 1991 were unarmed versions R or RB trying to bait eagles into a SAM trap per Iraqi sources

the whole point of soviet fighters was
1 make the job of their attackers easier by keeping NATO fighters busy ( and just look at the amount of aircraft needed to chase and hunt foxbats In 1991 )
2 shot down NATO attackers or achieve mission kills
It was not to play Red Baron and get into prolonged dog fights with NATO fighters
The pilots didn’t have the expertise and neither did the aircraft had the combat resilience
So seems like goals for soviet fighters are air denial , air parity and maybe local transitory air superiority ( like right before and during a major air offensive) but NEVER complete air superiority or air supremacy against a peer or near peer adversary
 
Last edited:
The only times they were shot down in the Gulf War was when their pilots stupidly tried to turn with Eagles. IIRC one Foxbat outran all the missiles fired at it.
Problem is, at Mach 2+, you are traveling at 30 Miles a Minute.
Assuming combat over central Iraq, 8 minutes at top speed means you won't be over Iraq any longer, unless you turn
 
Combat capable in terms of carrying IR homing weapons or ARM to supplement the meager force of soviet SEAD planes
What meager force? The Soviets were not in the business of specialized SEAD aircraft, aside from the MiG-25BM, and largely relied on existing strike aircraft to do the job, which meant a very wide pool of available aircraft. And in any case the Soviets built about 100 MiG-25BMs, which is not far off from the 116 F-4Gs the USAF initially converted.
 
Last edited:
What meager force? The Soviets were not in the business of specialized SEAD aircraft, aside from the MiG-25BM, and largely relied on existing strike aircraft to do the job, which meant a very wide pool of available aircraft. And in any case the Soviets built about 100 MiG-25BMs, which is not far off from the 116 F-4Gs the USAF initially converted.
I think just 55 mig25 bm and none operational by 1983 when Cold War was at its height
Anyway how about a ECMversion just equipped with jamming equipment like yak28pp and the ECM version of su24 ?
 
Top