SR 71 AGAINST MOSCOW - JUDGED BY THE MURPHY LAW
Chapter 1 - The Soviet Planning To Defeat The SR 71 Program :https://sites.google.com/site/sr71xm...oviet-planning
Key Publishing Forum: http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=115044
Chapter 2 - MiG 25 RB X YF 14 Tomcat II Over Sinai in 1973 :https://sites.google.com/site/sr71xm...over-the-sinai
Key Publishing Forum: http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=115178
Chapter 3 - MiG 25P to MiG 31A , From SHADOW to DARKNESS :https://sites.google.com/site/sr71xm...ow-to-darkness
Key Publishing Forum: http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=115390
Chapter 4 - SR 71 Blackbird, The Legacy of Murphy's Law : https://sites.google.com/site/sr71xm...phy-law-legacy
Key Publishing Forum: http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=119286
Chapter 5 - MiG 31 Foxhound Vs. SR 71 Blackbird , 007 At Service of the Soviet Union: NEXT
Key Publishing Forum : NEXT
Chapter 2 - MiG 25 RB Foxbat X F 14A Tomcat II in
The Yom Kippur War
To see the complete files will be necessary to link:https://sites.google.com/site/sr71xm...over-the-sinai
In those hypothetical scenarios of battles had been described in the chapter 1, which are no longer hypothetical when the opponent leaves the theory to practice, using large-scale version of the MiG 25RB by allies of the USSR in the first half of the 70 would at least have a political impact despite anything. Despite the objetive these paper would not be to describe the operations of MiG 25RB, however it is important to mention that before the Yom Kippur War in 1973 the presence of MiG 25RB from Soviet Union in Egypt with the official mission in recconaissance, but with the secret most important mission to demonstrate the performance of the MiG 25 RB to the West analystes to impresse these about the suppose performance of the interceptor MiG 25P, with the goal to avoid the reconaissance missions of the SR 71 Blackbird over the Soviet Union.
Under the full command of the Soviets the missions of the MiG 25 RB caused great concern among U.S. and Israel, once that the main interceptor of Israel and US the fighter F 4E Phantom II had been equipped with medium range missiles AIM 7E Sparrow were not effective to intercept the MiG 25RB from Soviet Union. Despite the Soviet squad had left Egypt long before the outbreak of hostilities, since they were expelled by the President of Egypt once had demanded that the Soviet Union should sold the MiG 25RB to Egypt and if the Soviet Union refused then would be necessary to send back the aircraft for the Soviet Union from Egypt .The Soviets did not authorize the sale of MiG 25RB to Egypt or any other nation until that time, so in retaliation of Egypt was necessary to remove the MiG 25RB from there.
Once the War had begun between Egypt and Syria against Israel, the Israel Air Force failed to stop the divisions formed by tanks (T 54, T 55 and T 62) and infantry assault vehicles (BMP 1) of the armies of Egypt and Syria, as these were protected by a strong and well assembly air defense system consists of: SA 2 Guideline, SA 3 Goa, SA 6 Gainfull , SA 7 Grail, SA 9 Gaskin and ZSU 23-4.Among all these systems the most advanced and lethal to the Israel Air Force was the SA 6 Gainfull that in addition to be mobile and armored, able to follow the divisions of assault, was also able to reach the fighters from Israel for more than 30 km ( 17 NMI) from distance and 10 km ( 32 208 ft) altitude.
After heavy losses of the Israel Air Force, in most cases by ground air defense, the high command of Israel decided attacking enemy armored forces with their powerful and well-trained force of tanks (Centurion, M 48, M 60) .This force of tanks had a history of getting great wins even when outnumbered by opponents, and the types of tanks available from Egypt and Syria were already known to Israel. Unfortunately what these crews of tanks of Israel had ignored his lethal enemies this time would not be the tanks of their opponents, but the new missile antitank AT 3 Sagger, distributed in large numbers of infantry between Egypt and Syria.
The Israeli attack against enemies ground forces were neutralized due in very large-scale employment of AT 3 missile that was simple and portable, which due to its simplicity was considered by many before the conflict began as rudimentary. The losses of tanks in this phase of the war were higher among Israeli forces than the forces of Egypt and Syria in their advance. This time in battle with Israeli forces were often under attack by the air forces of various nations of the Middle East and North Africa to North Korea sent a few squads to help Egypt, which in any case had a superiority in numbers of almost 2.5 : 1 over the Israel Air Force.
The situation of Israel had become more worst because its army (ground forces) had not mobile air defense systems for long range and altitude as had Egypt and Syria with their SA 6 Gainfull and supported by: ZSU 23 4 , SA 7 Grail and SA 9 Gaskin for protection in lower levels. Since the Egyptian Air Force had the Tu 16 Badger bombers as the fighter bombers could attack too in high or medium altitude the military ground forces of the Israel.Thus the strength of Israel Air Force now had to divide their limited fighters between to attack the ground forces of the enemy on two fronts totally different in geographical aspect and also protect their ground forces on both fronts of air attacks from enemies.
The aim of this brief comment is also shown that technological superiority is not to be confused with superior capabilities. The introduction of two new devices such as the surface-air-missile SA 6 Gainfull and anti-tank-missile AT 3 Sagger in wide-scale allowed the other equipment considered technologically inferior to Israel or the U.S. were employed in other missions, changing the whole configuration of the forces of Egypt and Syria and the alleged balance means that before the conflict was considered to be favorable to Israel.
The Soviet Union possibly had no interest in destroying the state of Israel, since it was his determination that would have provided more other advanced weapons systems to Egypt and Syria. While the Soviet Union had been equipped with the MiG-23 Flogger, MiG 25 P / RB Foxbat, Su 22 Fitter fighter bombers and Tu 22 Blinder supersonic bomber. Despite with this new and more capable weapons systems the Soviet Union continued to provide Syria and Egypt with the MiG 21 figther, the fighter bombers Su 7 Fitter fighter bombers and the Tu 16 Badger subsonic bombers .Even Su 15 Flagon with medium-range missiles AA 3 Anab, those had been replaced in production lines by MiG 25 P and AA 6 Acrid, it weren't delivered to any costumer of the Soviet Union. In the field of the land battles the Soviet Union had placed in service more advanced types of tanks as the T 64, while the forces of Egypt and Syria had received only small amounts of T 62 that was a little more advanced than the T 54 and T 55, and these were what constituted the majority of the force of tanks available to Egypt and Syria.
The most effective air-air missile of the conflict of 1973 were not the medium-range missiles AIM 7E Sparrow used by Israel in F 4E Phantom II, but the missiles as the short range or close combat as Sidewinder AIM 9J from U.S. and Shafrir that had been manufacturing in Israel which resulted in huge losses to the enemy forces despite those missiles had not all aspect cabability to engage their targets in the forward aspect. The USSR did not provide the Egyptians and the Syrians with short-range missiles as AA 2 Atoll with passive seeker SARH ( Semi Active Radar Homing)but only the passive infrared seeker as AA 2 Atoll IR to equip their MiG 21s.
In the doctrine of the Warsaw Pact these missiles had been operated by MiG 21 with IR and SARH versions of the short-range missile AA 2 Atoll, that enabling the MiG 21 to perform in all aspect interceptions against the enemies fighters, since the AA 2 Atoll IR were extremely limited to get the IR from tail or nozzles of the enemies fighter, in this engagements even under these conditions were considered to be equivalent to only the first generation of AIM 9B Sidewinder, which this time could already be considered as obsolete by the U.S. and Israel. The short-range missiles with seeker by SARH were only abandoned when the Soviet Union AA 8M Aspid with IR seeker with capability to hit targets in all aspect of engagement had emerged, and according with speculations it were possible that some versions of the AA 2 Atoll SARH were attracted by the irradions of the enemies radar fighters such as anti radiation missiles.
The relationship between Israel and the U.S. was very close, since the U.S. began to supply Israel with its more advanced types that made up their forces as e.g. the fighter bombers F 4E Phantom II and tanks M 60. The Soviet Union had exploited the resentment of the nations of North Africa and Middle East with the closeness between the U.S. and Israel, so in the geopolitical point of view was much more interesting to the Soviet Union to keep the existence of the state of Israel than its destruction. The recovery of the Egyptian and Syrian territories occupied by Israel in the Six Day War in 1967 would be a great victory for the Soviet Union, one that would defeat the major weapons systems the U.S. without to use all its most advanced systems, with some exceptions among which the SA 6 Gainfull , SA 7 Grail , SA 9 Gaskin , ZSU 23 4 and AT 3 Sagger .
In the case of the use of nuclear weapons by Israel, this situation would lead to direct involvement of U.S. and Soviet Union in the conflict. In this context the Soviet Union would present itself as the only power to protect the nations of North Africa and the Middle East in this threat of nuclear attack by Israel. The U.S. would be accused of having provided at least the nuclear technology to Israel and that nations like Saudi Arabia and even Iran could break up the alliance with the U.S., most likely turning the Soviet Union arm. If the Yom Kippur War in 1973 triggered the first oil crisis, when Saudi Arabia halted oil exports to Western nations, what would happen if Israel to prevent even its annihilation use nuclear weapons against the forces of Egypt and Syria?
In the first three days of the Yom Kippur's War the Israel Air Force had obtained a rate of victories of 2 : 1 favorable to Israel while it fought against an opposing enemies with a superiority of 2.5 : 1 against Israel, which was remarkable to Israel but would be enouch . If the losses of Israel had maintained in the same rates of the first three days all long of the war the losses of Israel aircrafts would have reached for 280 aircrafts after 12200 accomplished missions what could happen around the day 24, while the losses of the enemies of Israel could have reached the 500 aircrafts after the same 12200 accomplished missions from the Egypt( Lybia, Iraq, Argely and Marroco sent fighter squads to Egypt) and Syria until the day 24 . In this way the Israel Air Force that was in the beginning of the conflit had faced a superiority of almost 2.5 : 1 against Israel would be on the i.e day 24 to face a superiority of 3.5 : 1 against Israel, and in these circumstances it could be affirmed the rate of victories would which was favourable to Isarel as 2 : 1 in the first day of battles could be decreased to around 1:1 once the Israel would be faced against figthers superiority of 3.5 : 1 from their enemies. Then the war would be almost lost for Israel once the losses in the ground of tanks and armored vehicles were worst than the losses of aircrafts. The Iraq, Lybia, Argely and Marroco that already had sent several fighter squads to war against Israel could replaced hundreds of aircrafts and pilots lost for Egypt and Syria what indeed would become the Israel situation in the i.e. day 24 much more critical .
THE CHART OF THE AIRCRAFT'S LOST IN THE YOM KIPPUR WAR
After beginning Yom Kippur War against Israel in 1973 the situation has become critical of it, since Israel was facing two powerful enemies on two fronts at the same time and this time it was Israel who was on the defensive and losing the war .Faced with projections that the enemies would be not stop without nuclear weapons, Israel was vulnerable to a large-scale invasion. Then U.S. had decided to move to Israel nearly its entire new arsenal of so-called smart weapons from battle in land and air. Due to the urgency of shipments of these new weapons was necessary to use the transport aircraft C 5A Galaxy and C 141 Starfighter with addition for civil aircrafts as Israel Boeing B 707 and B 747, and this operation was coded as Nickel Glass. In these operations the United States sent 20,000 tons ( 44.092.000 lb)of equipment through the use of their air transport fleet and Israel airlifted 5,000 tons ( 11.023.000 lb) using their fleet of civil and military air transport.
Those equipments and weapons had been delivered from USA since day 09 of October in 1973 to Israel were in great part responsible to change the balance of the war in favour to Israel once the losses rates decreased in the air and the ground battles, and until the end of the war the aircrafts losses account 121 aircrafts than 283 had been estimated in the begnning of the war. These new weapons could be classified as sophisticated and powerful, even in the year of 2012 there are less than a dozen of countries that could display such systems in its military forces. The short list of equipments and weapons delivered could be described as: laser guided bombs as Paveway, TV contrast guided bomb as HOBOS, TV imaging contrast guided missiles as AGM 65A Maverick, TV data link guided bombs as Walleye, anti radar missiles as AGM 45 Shike, anti radar missiles as AGM 78 Standard, ECM( Electronic Counter Measures) pods to jamm the enemy radars, reconnaissance drones with data link to transmit TV images in real time , anti tank missiles for infantry as TOW, tanks M 60 with laser telemeter and ballistic computer , e.g. The most part of these equipments and weapons in that time still in acceptance phase in the USA military forces and some in development phase when were delivered at Israel as emergency measure to avoid the worst for Israel once most of those weapons had been classified as secret and the exposition of those in real conflict could put these new technological achievements in jeopardize in some hipotectical war with USSR.
A U.S. military intelligence predicted a great threat in this large operation that due to urgency in moving the equipment in a few days would be necessary to maintain exposed to attack at airports in Israel a lot of transport aircrafts. They were unloading weapons and live ammunition, in the case of one of these aircraft was hit in the ground, probably others that were close were also destroyed due to the type of cargo they were carrying. To face the enemy fighter bombers and their escorts fighters, the Israel Air Force had been prepared to repel any attack attempt, but if the MIG 25RB were used in an attack at high altitude and supersonic speed, since when they were based in Egypt, one its fled with the colors and markings of the Egypt Air Force , there could inflicted several losses at those transport aircrafts , equipment and ground personnel.
Thus even though the U.S. strongly denied that this had happened, they secretly sent prototypes of the YF 14A Tomcat II armed with the new missiles as AIM 54 Phoenix to protect the Nickel Glass operation, and that fighters were placed in Israel bases in case of a possible attack by MiG 25RB supposedly from Egypt. For the U.S. the potential threat of the MiG 25RB was real and that did the same sending prototypes still undergoing tests to protect the operation, as if there were attacks on the MiG 25 RB in these airports and without the protection of YF 14, the operation Nickel Glass should be renamed to Nickel Graveyard.
Due to possibility that the Soviet Union had maintained in secret the MiG 25RB in undergrounds hardened shelters in the same air base of Egypt that were operated the MiG 25RB before the Yom Kippur War. The USA had requested the prototypes of the YF 14A Tomcat II for protection of the air bridge between the USA and Israel called as Nickel Glass Operation. The rumors had indicated the possibility that MiG 25RB were kept in these underground shelters in sealed compartment under an inert atmosphere to prevent damages due to oxidation of the fighter as well its delicated electronic systems.Once the Soviet personnel came back to Egypt these fighters suppose stored in Egypt could be placed in operation in matters of hours instead of days in case the same fighters were brought dismounted by the transports Antonov An 22 Antei.
The MiG 25 RB could carry 5.0 tons ( 11023 lb) of free fall bombs had been maintaining a maximum speed of Mach 2.8 at 20 000 m ( 65 617 ft) of altitude. Its navigations equipments and ground map radars would allow a precision in the attack even better than could be obtained for short range ballistic missiles( SRBM) as SS 1 SCUD. The missiles SCUD could carry a conventional warhead of the HE ( High Explosive) of 500 Kg ( 1102 lb), therefore a formation of four MiG 25 RB would attack a target with an equivalent strength of 21 missiles SS 1 SCUD for each mission, with the advantage that fighters MiG 25 RB would make the reconaissance of the target and the damages had been obtained in the attack at the same mission. The possibility of those MiG 25 RB attack a civilian objective it would be very remote, unlike the missiles SCUD that were susceptible to deviate of the objectives since some failures in this guiadance system and then by this to reach civilians areas.
Some very controversial speculations about the operations of the MiG 25 RB were that its ability to strike was not only due to the possibility to carry non-guided bombs, but to provide guidance to missiles fired by other platforms (air, land and sea).In its first generation MiG RB would use its navigation system called Peleng for getting its position with relative accuracy and then illuminate the target area with beam from his own radar. With the target area illuminated from high-altitude and distance the MiG 25 RB would be out of range for air defenses allowing long-range missiles as SS 1 SCUD were directed against the target area had been guided for radar beam reflected from the target area as a missile with a SARH seeker.
Among the ground-strike missile that could be targeted by MiG 25 RB were the: the Kh 22 Kitchen from strike aircraft, ASCM from submarine-launched missiles, ASCMs from warships and SS 1 Scud SRBM as mobile tactical ballistic missiles. But most speculation was that the anti-aircraft ground-air system of long range SA 4 Ganef that could had a secondary mission that would be directed against targets on the surface by illuminating the target by MiG 25 RB. In the initial a middle phase of the flew of the SA 4 missile and others ASCMs would be guided by radar stations of the battery, while in approaching of the target area at high altitude, this would be guided by the radar beam from MiG 25 RB received by antennas on the tail of the missiles, and in the final phase the missile would be guided by reflecting of the radar signal from the target.
The SRBM SS 1 Scud would be guided in the initial and middle phase of the flew by his own INS ( Inertial navigation system) and when this missile had been entered in its final phase of the flew it would receive a radar signal sent by MiG 25 RB in an passive homing seeker from the missile reflected by the target area. The reason for some speculations about the final versions of the SS 1 Scud had been assembled with passive homing seeker were the poor accuracy of the INS when the missile could be carrying conventional warhead with HE ( high explosive) that demanded better accuracy to be effective than nuclear warhead .
The missile SS 1 SCUD had a precision that is measured as CEP ( Circular Estatistic Probability) with radius of 1 Km ( 3281 ft). The CEP is measuring method that could be an decription as about an surface with radius of 1 Km ( 3281 ft) would be this reached by 50% of the missiles fired like SS 1 SCUD .In the case of an target with radius of 250m ( 820 ft) that should receive almost 1000 kg ( 2204 lb) of HE to be severy damaged would be necessary the fire off 64 missiles as SS 1 SCUD with warhead of 500 kg ( 1102 lb) of HE and CEP of 1Km ( 3281 ft) to assure that probability at least 2 missiles reached the target with 250m ( 820 ft) of radius.
In this case that missiles as SS 1 SCUD could be equipped with a SARH seeker that in the final phase of approaching of the objective this missile would be guided by the refleted emission of the radar beam from MiG 25 RB ,with its high adavanced and accuracy PELENG navigation system, that could be illuminating the area of the target out of the range of the opponent's air defenses, and this way if it increased in several orders the precision of SS 1 SCUD for the suppose CEP of 250 m ( 820 ft), the same target with a radius of 250m ( 820 ft) could be hit for two missiles with an equivalent load of 1000kg ( 2204 lb) of HE, in this mode would be necessary to fire 4 missiles instead of 64 missiles with a CEP of 1Km ( 3281 ft).
In this case of the SA 4 Ganef this could be used against slightly armored targets, such as advanced air bases or dispersed air bases and mainly against strikes from heliborne and airborne forces of the NATO. Indeed these possible airborne and heliborne assaults from NATO were considered by the High Command of the Soviet Union as a great threat. The USSR saw a large-scale air assault as a major threat to their concept of heavy armored divisions, as these were considerably slower to be moved quickly in order to stop the air assaults. The use of fighters and fighters-bombs against a NATO air assault was a little advantageous option for the strategists of the USSR, since this was a terrible experience during the beginning of World War II in which the technological superiority of the Luftwaffe caused catastrophic losses at the VVS with their numerical superiority. After this tragic experience for the USSR the use of aviation should be done in order to achieve surprise and speed in air strikes, and to avoid at all costs the use of the aircraft power against targets when the enemy has the technological advantage and his fighters were prepared for battle over this predictable target.
As these transport aircraft from air assault of the NATO could be out of the radar range or below the horizon of the SA 4 Ganef battery, the missiles could not be targeted by the MiG 25 RB against those aircraft, but this would be the area where the aircraft or assault troops ashore in order to employ the heavy fragmentation warhead with proximity fuse using programmable under the ground to try to damage or destroy the aircraft in the area and the troops already landed.
At least one battery from system SA 4 Ganef was sent to Egypt at the same time that the MiG 25 RB had been operating in Egypt. With the return of the MiG 25 RB for the Soviet Union was also the return of SA 4 Ganef battery , which increased speculation that the Soviet Union had invested considerable resources in this heavy and expensive Surface - Air missile system that many experts saw as ineffective against the NATO fighter bombers due to lack of maneuverability of these heavy missiles, that could be considered effective only against large bombers or large transport aircraft.
The choice of the ramjet propulsion for the missile SA 4 Ganef with fragmentation warhead of 250Kg ( 550 lb) and missile SA 6 Gaimfull with fragmentation warhead of 100kg ( 220 lb) were attributed by some experts at the possibility to increase the range against ground targets, since there are speculations that those missiles could has two modes of operation of the ramjet engine of the missiles that would be chosen the mode before its launch. The first would be against air targets that should be engaged at high supersonic speed, and another against ground targets at long range that the supersonic speed would be reduced to obtain greater range. The complexity of liquid fuel ramjet engines of the SA 4 Ganef and SA 6 Gainfull had been made these systems more expensive and complex when compared to SA 3 Goa and SA 5 Gamon system operated by the IA PVO with rocket engines with solid and liquid fuels.
In returning the Soviet MiG 25 RB to Egypt in 1973 during the final phase of the Yom Kippur War, there were considerable speculation that they could participate the war to guide supersonic cruise missiles launched from Soviet submarines close to the Israel coast against targets in the Sinai or even Israel cities. According to some sources this possibility of strike against Israel was informed by the U.S. government, and contributed for Israel to accept a ceasefire, since it was unwilling to accept a ceasefire because the great victories that put the capital of Egypt and the capital of Syria en route to its army in that advances .
The U.S. reportedly informed that even the YF 14A Tomcat that could be employed to protect Israel from attacks by Soviet MiG 25RB with free-fall bombs, they would be less effective against cruise missile attacks in which the supersonic MiG 25 RB could be operating long range so as to be beyond the reach of the few YF 14A with AIM 54A Phoenix missiles . The SAM MIM 23A Hawk and F 4E Phamtom with AIM 7E Sparrow missile of Israel were not effective against the MiG 25 RB due to the high altitude and speed in which they could carry out bomb attacks free-fall in the attacks, much less supersonic cruise missile directed by MiG 25RB.
Indeed t the MiG 25RB had returned to Egypt in the last week of the conflict in order to achieve broad recognition of the situation of war, which at this stage was disastrous for Egypt and Syria. Even under total air supremacy of the Israeli Air Force at this stage of the war the MiG 25RB had completed the mission without any loss or damage. This operation has gathered information from the rearguard of Israel that were used to persuade all in the military high command of Egypt to accept the ceasefire, due to fact that even suffering disastrous losses had yet who wanted to continue the fight against Israel. As confirmed recognition mission from MiG 25 RB, the continuing of the war could put the capital Cairo from Egypt under attack by the Israeli army.
The Soviet Union had pushed the U.S. to persuade Israel to accept a ceasefire, which had been reinvigorated with new weapons sent by the U.S. and exploring strategic mistakes of Egypt and Syria, Israel was in the edge to completely defeat those nations, there were many who wanted it. Indeed could be proved as the international airport of Damascus capital of Syria was under attack by the artillery army from Israel at this stage of the war. Under U.S. pressure, Israel was persuaded to accept a ceasefire, since if it did not do so would be attacked by the USSR on a large scale, possibly with the use of MiG 25RB.
This short summary about the threat posed by MiG 25RB demonstrates how its skills were impressive. But it was the interceptor MiG 25P which was better known and in many cases ended up ranked by many as an aircraft or even obsolete up to the time that went into operation or had been created by propaganda purpose. The truth should be more complex, since it will always be under a cloak of secrecy and misinformation.
To see the complete files will be necessary to link:https://sites.google.com/site/sr71xm...over-the-sinai
ASAS - ASAS Magazine - www.revistasas.com.br
APA - Australian Power Analyzes Website - www.ausairpower.net
AIRFORCES - Air Forces Monthly Magazine - www.airforcesmonthly.com
GORDON, Yelfin. MiG 25 and MiG 31: Defensive Front Line. Leicester - UK: Midland Prublishing Limeted, 1997.
HACKETT, General Sir John, BARRACLOUGH, Brigadier Sir Jonh, BURROW, Sir Bernard, HUNT, Brigadier Keneneth, McGEOCH, Vice-Admiral Sir Ian, MACRAE, Norman, STRAWSON, Major-General John. THE THIRD WORD WAR - AUGUST 1985. New York - USA: Macmillan Publishing, 1978.
BOLLARDIÈRE, Jacques Paris, PRATS, Juan P. , KISTER, Pierre. THE WAR AND THE DISARM. Editions Grammont. Lausanne - France, 1979.
OVERSCAN'S GUIDE TO RUSSIAN MILITARY AVIONICS - firstname.lastname@example.org
WIKIPEDIA - Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. www.wikipedia.com
MiG 25 FOXBAT - www.vectorsite.net
FAS - Federations of American Scientists - www.fas.org
Google Images: Imagery Sources - www.images.google.com