WI :- SR-71 shot down

Rajveer Naha

Rajveer Naha

Say SR-71s violate USSR airspace here and there throughout the 70s and 80s and in 1987 one is shot down using R-33 missiles fired from a MiG-31 over Kamchatka and the pilots are captured.
The R-33s were designed with SR-71s in mind and we're capable of performance similar to the Aim-54 Phoenix of the F-14 Tomcats which were capable of downing the SR-71s.
The Soviets had calculated the interception plans down to the last second. Takeoff was to after 16 minutes of the alarm sounding and six aircrafts were to box in the SR-71 and fire R-33s from multiple vectors and hopefully one hit would be scored. The MIG-31s were able to lock onto the SR-71s quite a few times. The MIG-31s had PESA radars, the only fighter/interceptor to do so at the time so finding the SR-71s won't take long. In 2.5mins after take off it reached 82000 feet and it's pilot could see the SR-71s with their naked eyes.
Let's assume that they down a SR-71 show it's parts and Pilots on live TV.

FOLKS PLEASE ASSUME THAT THE BLACKBIRD WAS SHOT DOWN. THIS IS A THREAD ABOUT ITS CONSEQUENCES, REACTIONS AROUND THE WORLD, ITS IMPACT ON PERCEPTIONS ON MANNED FLIGHTS AND NOT TO DISCUSS IF THE SHOOT DOWN WAS POSSIBLE OR NOT.
Now what.....
 
Last edited:

ShySusan

The Soviets tried that. Repeatedly. The problem is that the SR-71 is just so damn fast. It would be like trying to hit a bullet with a bullet. It's theoretically possible, but the odds are so long that the chances of a successful intercept are somewhere in the order of one in a million.

But, had it actually worked, I imagine the reaction, and fallout would be similar to when the USSR shot down Captain Powers and his U-2. Though to be honest, I'm still having a hard time seeing a Blackbird shot down.
 

MattII

It depends where you fire the missile from. To guarantee a kill you'd have to fire from fairly close to the aircraft, which may not be doable, depending on the surveillance equipment the Blackbird has.
 

ShySusan

MattII said:
It depends where you fire the missile from. To guarantee a kill you'd have to fire from fairly close to the aircraft, which may not be doable, depending on the surveillance equipment the Blackbird has.
Click to expand...
It would have to be a head on intercept. The Foxhound could "only" do mach 2.8. The Blackbird would likely be at mach 3+. And there are reports that, if pushed, the plane could damn near hit mach 4.
 
Rajveer Naha

Rajveer Naha

Well the R-33 was designed with the SR-71 in mind, it had similar capabilities to that of the Aim-54 Phoenix. It is said that with Aim-54s an F-14 could down a SR-71.
The Soviets had calculated the interception plans down to the last second. Takeoff was to after 16 minutes of the alarm sounding and six aircrafts were to box in the SR-71 and fire R-33s from multiple vectors and hopefully one hit would be scored. The MIG-31s were able to lock onto the SR-71s quite a few times. The MIG-31s had PESA radars, the only fighter/interceptor to do so at the time so finding the SR-71s won't take long. In 2.5mins after take off it reached 82000 feet and it's pilot could see the SR-71s with their naked eyes.

So let's assume with capable systems available already they manage a lucky hit.
 
Rajveer Naha

Rajveer Naha

ShySusan said:
It would have to be a head on intercept. The Foxhound could "only" do mach 2.8. The Blackbird would likely be at mach 3+. And there are reports that, if pushed, the plane could damn near hit mach 4.
Click to expand...
Forcing the engines was probably possible but it would damage the engine beyond repair(MiG-25s got their engine ruined by pushing to mach 3.2). And mach 3.45 was achieved without the spying payload.
And Blackbirds did have a habit of accidents(mid air breakup, exploding engine, airframe damage every flight and an unprecedented loss rate). If the damage was great enough it may not transition back to turbofan mode forcing a controlled crash or maybe outright crash in unfriendly territory.
 
Last edited:

Riain

Banned
ShySusan said:
It would have to be a head on intercept. The Foxhound could "only" do mach 2.8. The Blackbird would likely be at mach 3+. And there are reports that, if pushed, the plane could damn near hit mach 4.
Click to expand...

The SR71 was started with tetra-ethyl boron fuel, which releases oxygen as it burns. It was suspected that in dire need this stuff, known as piss, could be injected into the engines allowing the plane to climb to 100,000'+, beyond the altitude the engines could operate with simple air.

I don't think the SR71 could do much over mach 3.3 because some shock wave hit some part of the airframe causing instability. Apparently the A12 could go over m3.4 because it didn't have the same front fuselage shape.
 
Rajveer Naha

Rajveer Naha

Riain said:
The SR71 was started with tetra-ethyl boron fuel, which releases oxygen as it burns. It was suspected that in dire need this stuff, known as piss, could be injected into the engines allowing the plane to climb to 100,000'+, beyond the altitude the engines could operate with simple air.

I don't think the SR71 could do much over mach 3.3 because some shock wave hit some part of the airframe causing instability. Apparently the A12 could go over m3.4 because it didn't have the same front fuselage shape.
Click to expand...
What do you think would happen(I mean reactions around the world) after the Soviets announce that they have successfully downed a SR-71 and show the captured pilots on television.
 

Dorknought

ShySusan said:
It would be like trying to hit a bullet with a bullet.
Click to expand...
80DuRNj.jpg
 

Dorknought

Rajveer Naha said:
What do you think would happen(I mean reactions around the world) after the Soviets announce that they have successfully downed a SR-71 and show the captured pilots on television.
Click to expand...
Perhaps no more than a rerun of the 1960 U2 Incident. Cancel the 1987 Washington summit?
Are the crew really likely to survive a shoot down?
 
Rajveer Naha

Rajveer Naha

Dorknought said:
Are the crew really likely to survive a shoot down?
Click to expand...
Maybe they have a chance and eject or the Soviets have to do with burner remains. Successfully bailing does not guarantee survival 100% either. Maybe they get injured and die of wounds. Kamchatka is sparsely populated as it is.
 

MattII

ShySusan said:
It would have to be a head on intercept. The Foxhound could "only" do mach 2.8. The Blackbird would likely be at mach 3+. And there are reports that, if pushed, the plane could damn near hit mach 4.
Click to expand...
That's why I mentioned the surveillance equipment, because they'd have to get close before launching to have a reasonable chance of scoring a hit.
 

Riain

Banned
I don't think a shootdown in 1987 would be catastrophic for the Cold War. I think peripheral overnights were likely assumed and spy satellites were well known so there wouldn't be the shock that the U2 incident caused 27 years earlier.
 
Rajveer Naha

Rajveer Naha

Thoresby said:
Surviving pilots is the most unlikely part. As others have said while it is theoretically possible that the Mig-31/R-33 combo could shoot down a SR-71, though the odds on that aren't great, the odds of pilot survival are so infinitesimal as to be essentially zero.
Click to expand...
Why do you say so? The U-2 pilot did survive.
 
Rajveer Naha

Rajveer Naha

Riain said:
I don't think a shootdown in 1987 would be catastrophic for the Cold War. I think peripheral overnights were likely assumed and spy satellites were well known so there wouldn't be the shock that the U2 incident caused 27 years earlier.
Click to expand...
Even without a calamity people around the world and in the US will surely have things to say.
Maybe how people think of it changes.
As you can see in the comments a shroud of invincibility surrounds the SR-71, a sort of romanticism which is in this case shattered forever.
 
Last edited:

RamscoopRaider

Donor
The question is that by the 70's and 80's why is the SR-71 actually violating Soviet airspace? AFAIK after the 60's the US switched to having the SR-71 go outside Soviet airspace and use the slant range from being so high up to peek on territory a couple hundred miles inside without entering Soviet airspace. So why has this changed ITTL?
 
Rajveer Naha

Rajveer Naha

RamscoopRaider said:
The question is that by the 70's and 80's why is the SR-71 actually violating Soviet airspace? AFAIK after the 60's the US switched to having the SR-71 go outside Soviet airspace and use the slant range from being so high up to peek on territory a couple hundred miles inside without entering Soviet airspace. So why has this changed ITTL?
Click to expand...
Because I want to see it shot down 😉 Assume that the Americans seeing the seeming invulnerable nature of the SR-71s decide to try something more i.e. get a hundred miles into Soviet airspace to see a hundred mile more.
 

RamscoopRaider

Donor
Rajveer Naha said:
Because I want to see it shot down 😉 Assume that the Americans seeing the seeming invulnerable nature of the SR-71s decide to try something more i.e. get a hundred miles into Soviet airspace to see a hundred mile more.
Click to expand...
The US knew it wasn't invulnerable and that's why they stopped doing that because it could in fact be shot down, they did not want in incident, and improved satellites made it less and less necessary. By 1980 they were already deciding not to upgrade the SR-71 as they saw its utility limited, the U-2 got those upgrades but by that point the U-2 was intended for surveillance in places it would not get shot at. Basically you need to explain why the US would do something they know is risky and a provocation

Much easier to have the USSR shoot down the SR-71 outside Soviet airspace
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top