Mikoyan MiG-25 "FOXBAT"

[KJ_Lesnick]

Hi guys, dug out this old thread as the SR-71 propaganda has spiked once more recently....

I figure whatever the SR-71's top speed is, it was known only to the USAF (and probably the USSR pilots who happened to have tried to intercept one... and failed).

The SR had a modification with weapons bay or some other means to deliver something very big and nasty very fast very far. Irrepective if it was ever tested, installed, etc. This capability could have been exploited.

Technically there were proposals of the A-12 called the R-12, B-12/B-71, and RB-12/71. If I recall at least one of them could carry Polaris warhead.

Then from there came the RS-71 which was designed for reconnaissance strike: Effectively, the goal being to identify anything that happened to survive the first-strike and destroy it with nuclear weapons. For one reason or another, General LeMay felt like calling the plane SR for Strategic Reconnaissance, and asked President Johnson's speech-writer to alter RS-71 to SR-71.

While it required thousands of documents to be changed from RS-71 to SR-71 and, for one reason or another, the aircraft was never fitted/tested with the provision to launch such a weapon, it was felt the aircraft could be easily configured to do so. The chine-bays were modular and, in addition to mounting all sorts of sensors, could carry weapons. The weapon initially specified wasn't clear, it seemed to be some form of progenitor of the AGM-69 which appears to have been cancelled.

The AGM-69 had been later proposed as an option but was never fitted, though Lockheed's ADP had looked into the idea quite favorably (when launched from higher altitudes and speed, the missile would be able to go further on momentum).

The MiG was more than capable to intercept and down and SR with very high probability even alone.

Absolutely not, Lt. Belenko basically said that.

While, it might have been possible to coordinate an intercept from multiple angles whereby some missiles would be fired head-on, others from abeam, and some from the rear quarter, and basically make it highly difficult for an SR-71 to escape attack, I'm not sure how easy that would be do-able in practice.

At high supersonic speeds the airfoil doesn't work the way it does at lower speeds. Lift is created by the angle of attack.

Lift is created by alpha at low speeds too, the pressure differential is a lot lower (which combined with shockwave formation, produces considerably more drag) when supersonic than subsonic, and the center of pressure moves back to varying degrees, which tends to reduce elevator control available for maneuvering. As a basic rule of thumb, the g-load that could be pulled when supersonic is about half that of subsonic owing to this (as well as other variable such as airframe heating, depending on aircraft construction).

Also the burned engines myth is already busted, they didn't burn. See that video, you could disregard what you don't like, but there are some graphs of the power Vs drag, lift, etc. that can't be disregarded

Looking at the figures you presented around 3.5 could be carried out at higher latitudes and around 3.77 at lower latitudes.

I had already figured the top speed was probably around Mach 3.75 based on the fact that the nose was very long and the areas that had some high temperature aluminum construction (350 C limit) were either in front of the canopy frame or behind it, as well as the mach meter (it didn't read up to Mach 4, but instead read just up to Mach 3. When flying at 3.2 mach, it looked like it was at 0.2, so I figured it was above 3, but below 4).

I would guess the SR-71's speed was greatly higher than listed, the USSR made some estimates of the top-speed based on espionage, some guesswork, and got it wrong.

P.S. The current record holder of absolute maximum altitude and time to altitude to 25, 30, 35 and 37-something km is the MiG-31...

The MiG-31, despite using turbofans also had a mass-injection pre-compressor cooling system that would allow the temperatures to be pushed up higher than the MiG-25, while also allowing more thrust lower.

 

[Dynoman]

DIA documents regarding the 1976 defection of a Soviet MiG-25 Foxbat pilot Viktor Belenko to Japan. Provides some interesting insight into the MiG and what the pilot was told regarding performance.

 

[Desertfox]

Its quite easy to estimate the Mig-25 and SR-71 theoretical top speeds. Mach cones are well known phenomena and you want the entire plane to be inside the cone or you risk creating hot spots. So just figure out the angle from the nose to the wing tip and see what Mach number that cone corresponds to.

 

[publiusr]

To see an air race..

 

[Ronny]

DIA documents regarding the 1976 defection of a Soviet MiG-25 Foxbat pilot Viktor Belenko to Japan. Provides some interesting insight into the MiG and what the pilot was told regarding performance.

That great, thanks

 

[zjz]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/18/world/europe/viktor-belenko-dead.html

 

[F-2]

MiG-25P FOXBAT A Flight and Combat Employment Training Manual

A copy of the MiG-25P FOXBAT A Flight and Combat Employment Training Manual. It was written in English by the Soviets for the FOXBAT A airc...

aviationarchives.blogspot.com

Iraqi MiG-25P manual, early 80s

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I OCRed the manual so it can be copy/pasted.

LINK

 

[Scott Kenny]

I was thinking about something regarding the MiG-25's top-speed. There are some things about it that don't seem to add up...

For example the engines: The Tumansky R-15 -- It only has a pressure ratio of 4.75:1, and 5 compressor-stages and from what I remember a pretty high turbine temperature. I know the Russians didn't quite have the engine capability that we had, but I still find it hard to believe that with that kind of pressure ratio with most of their thrust no doubt coming off ram-compression and the engine's colossal afterburner that it would redline at only Mach 2.83, and burn out at Mach 3.2

The plane had a fuel that had a high-temperature flashpoint, which while not quite as high as the JP-7 used on the Blackbird, still higher than say JP-4. Other than the Blackbird, the only plane I can think of that utilized a high flashpoint fuel was the XB-70 Valkyrie, which used JP-6. It is officially stated to be a Mach 3 capable design, however they did wind-tunnel tests to Mach 4, and the chief-engineer of the project stated that the inlets could perform Mach 4 speed, and it's been acknowledged that the J-93 could achieve it as well.

Now I'm not necessarily saying the MiG-25 could do Mach 4. But I'm wondering if it's limit is 2.8/3.2 or a bit higher than that especially for quick bursts.

Of course I don't know why anyone would lie about it though. It's not like it's a new state of the art design and it's not even our design.


Kendra

It's not a matter of running out of thrust, it's a matter of exceeding allowed turbine inlet temperatures. Which can mean your turbine blades stretch and start rubbing on the inside of the housing, which then causes a very nasty titanium fire that burns the airframe in half.

Compelling information. Unfortunately, the speed listed is what we are TOLD was observed. I've also heard other claims of MiG-25's doing 3.4 Mach during possibly the same overflight, or during another Israel overflight.

Not to sound distrusting, but keep in mind what a person is told isn't always what's true. After all, the Blackbird's speed has never been declassified and many people still accept the figure that the plane can do Mach 3.2, maybe 3.6 tops (even despite the fact that the Blackbird uses a specific type of Titanium alloy that can go up to 1,200 C, is actively cooled and the J-58 without any mods can do Mach 4 -- not even requring a bleed-bypass system, engine-trim and derich, active cooling for the engine, metallurgy changes and extra air-cooling.)


Kendra Lesnick

The J58 as installed in the Blackbird is turbine inlet temperature limited. Depending on just how cold the air is, a Blackbird could go faster over winter Siberia than over summer Iraq or Libya.

The inlet spikes physically run out of travel at Mach 3.55 and unstart the engines, though. Also, at Mach 3.55 the nose shock cone will touch the ailerons and cause control issues.

Compton electrons would damage the electronics more than anything else. How about a neutron flux generating warhead to pre-detonate enemy re-entry warheads.? ;D

They won't pre-detonate, they'll just fizzle instead.

Hi guys, dug out this old thread as the SR-71 propaganda has spiked once more recently. Some answers were very helpful and informative, thanks!

I just want to add some considerations to the thread:

1. What do you expect to hear from highly trained and indoctrinated USAF pilots? Full disclosure of BVR tactics and parameters maybe? Any trained military will give you the answer your question suggests, will say he doesn't know, or something random.
2. What do you expect to hear from a member of the Russian VKS?
3. What was the purpose of the MiG-25 after all? When seemingly SU-15, MiG-23 and even MiG-21 could do thye same job. They built more than a thausand of that extreme machine.
4. Why do some of you assume the USSR accounted for every modification they made or even for the actual parameters of an extreme and expensive weapons system that they built in big numbers - obviously relying on it for performing of some not really clear tasks. At that level of performance it should be intuitive that those extreme machines had parameters and flight envelopes dictating very specific way of piloting and missions profiles. - applies for both SR and MiG. Why would anyone disclose the actual parameters, profile, envelope, etc?

Intercepting B-70s was the original design intent. Then intercepting B52s and occasionally Blackbirds. MiG-31s added a look-down/shoot-down radar for dealing with cruise missiles.

P.S. The current record holder of absolute maximum altitude and time to altitude to 25, 30, 35 and 37-something km is the MiG-31... Figure it out by yourself. The MiG-25 is lighter and has more thrust at high altitude... Anyway, that's not that interesting, because in the high speed intercept game, time of takeoff has bigger influence on the chances than an altitude and speed drag race... that the MiG would have won...

Except that you need to get the aircraft into position to shoot a missile. The SR-71s "radar warning" response was to accelerate and turn. At Mach 3.whatever, each minute is 37 nautical miles. Yes, interceptors were somewhat more likely to succeed than fixed missiles (short of the SA-5 Galosh nukes around Moscow). But it's still an impossibly tiny point where the aircraft is in place to get within a couple miles of the ground track of a Blackbird and then also be there in time to get into proper flight parameters to launch a missile.

Completely ignoring the ECM systems fitted to the Blackbird, of course.

Its quite easy to estimate the Mig-25 and SR-71 theoretical top speeds. Mach cones are well known phenomena and you want the entire plane to be inside the cone or you risk creating hot spots. So just figure out the angle from the nose to the wing tip and see what Mach number that cone corresponds to.

Yup. Mach 3.55 or right around there for the Blackbird.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

The maximum Mach-number of the aircraft with and without the stabilizer differential control system is limited with respect to thermal strength of the engines and it amounts to 2.83.

For the same reason, the flight endurance at Mach-numbers exceeding 2.4 equals 15 min (at Mach-numbers M = 2.65 it amounts to 5 min). The flight time at Mach-numbers of M = 2.4 and less is not limited.

[...]

The service ceiling of the aircraft carrying four missiles under standard atmospheric conditions is 20.500m.

In this case, the aircraft mass at the service ceiling equals 25,800 kg and the remaining fuel amounts to 3500 kg. The average time of gaining an altitude of 20,000 m at M = 2.35 in standard atmosphere conditions, with the engines running at FULL REHEAT (ПОЛНЫЙ ФОРСАЖ), from the moment the take off run is started is equal to 9.7 min for the aircraft carrying four missiles .

 

[Scott Kenny]

The maximum Mach-number of the aircraft with and without the stabilizer differential control system is limited with respect to thermal strength of the engines and it amounts to 2.83.

I rest my case.

 

[Dew]

F-4 Phantom Pilot talks exclusively about Stolen Mig 25 Foxbat Viktor Belenko​

 

[hesham]

From, Lotnictwo 2006-10.

 

[Dew]

Artwork: "Air Intelligence - MiG 25P Exploitation"
Artist: William Helfenstein, US Air Force Art Collection
January 1, 1984

 

[F-2]

Artwork: "Air Intelligence - MiG 25P Exploitation"
Artist: William Helfenstein, US Air Force Art Collection

View attachment 740254

I tried to FOIA that case but I haven’t heard anything since early 2023.

 

[hesham]

From this magazine.

 

[F-14ATomcat]

The Blitz Over Isfahan | A Response to Iran's Account of the Capture of Iraqi MiG-25 Pilot Thaer Sobhi


The Blitz Over Isfahan reveals the secrets behind the downing of Iraqi MiG-25 pilot Thaer Sobhi in one of the most dangerous chapters of aerial conflict in urban warfare
the full story of the daring MiG-25 sortie that faced a deadly ambush over the skies of Isfahan in 1987, and the reaction of hero Thaer Sobhi Ahmed before his capture. You'll see exclusive details about the attack plan, the Chinese Volga missiles that turned the tide, and the testimony of Air Force Major General Fayed Qasim, which reveals previously untold secrets. A story of courage and sacrifice that will forever be remembered in the history of the Iraqi Air Force, documenting an epic in the sky where sacrifice was the title and heroism was the identity.
1. The Lightning Battle over Isfahan Reveals the Secrets of the Shooting of Iraqi Pilot Thaer Subhi,
Untold Details About the Capture of the Iraqi Hero and the Truth About the Iranian Account of the Capture of the MiG-25.


1. The true story of Thaer Sobhi and the capture of the MiG-25 in the Blitzkrieg Battle over Isfahan
2. The heroics of the Iraqi pilot reveal the enemy's deception in the Blitzkrieg Battle over Isfahan
3. Major General Fayed Qasim's testimony about the capture of Thaer Sobhi in the Blitzkrieg Battle over Isfahan
4. The secrets of the Chinese Volga missiles and the downing of the MiG-25 in the Blitzkrieg Battle over Isfahan
5. How Thaer Sobhi faced death in The Blitzkrieg Over Isfahan

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nFYZ4yDLVPQ&t=4s

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WghvyaoKh_A

 

[F-14ATomcat]

A Syrian AF recce aircraft MiG-25RBT was shot down over Lebanon on Aug. 31 1982 by IDF/AF SAM, an MIM-23B Hawk.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMOgQgkkuJM&rco=1

Minute 1:54 you can see the airplane coming down spinning


''In 1982, during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon , an Israeli MIM-23 Hawk missile system successfully intercepted and shot down a Syrian MiG-25RB reconnaissance aircraft.
https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/180077/
Syria previously had lost lost two MiG-25PDE ,first on Feb 13 1981 and second on 29 July 1981 however the IDF/AF never admitted the loss of an F-15A on that July 29th 1981 against a MiG-25PDE.

МиГ-25 над Израилем , Владимир Бабич
http://www.airwar.ru/history/locwar/bv/mig25isr/mig25isr.html

Another Russian source :

Ïîòåðè ÌèÃ-25 - Àâèàöèÿ â ëîêàëüíûõ êîíôëèêòàõ - www.skywar.ru

 

[GTX]

A Syrian AF recce aircraft MiG-25RBT was shot down over Lebanon on Aug. 31 1982 by IDF/AF SAM, an MIM-23B Hawk.
View attachment 781921
View attachment 781948
View attachment 781928
View attachment 781946


View attachment 781929

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMOgQgkkuJM&rco=1

Minute 1:54 you can see the airplane coming down spinning
View attachment 781944

''In 1982, during the Israeli invasion of Lebanon , an Israeli MIM-23 Hawk missile system successfully intercepted and shot down a Syrian MiG-25RB reconnaissance aircraft.
https://www.britishpathe.com/asset/180077/
Syria previously had lost lost two MiG-25PDE ,first on Feb 13 1981 and second on 29 July 1981 however the IDF/AF never admitted the loss of an F-15A on that July 29th 1981 against a MiG-25PDE.
View attachment 781923
МиГ-25 над Израилем , Владимир Бабич
http://www.airwar.ru/history/locwar/bv/mig25isr/mig25isr.html

Another Russian source :

Ïîòåðè ÌèÃ-25 - Àâèàöèÿ â ëîêàëüíûõ êîíôëèêòàõ - www.skywar.ru

Enough with posts such as this. As commented elsewhere, this forum is focused on technology, not operations. So we don't really need to post every time someone fires a missile, unless there is something different or interesting about it from a technical perspective.

 

[Squirrel]

Most of people know for the height record of the MiG-25.

''The MiG-25 holds the world altitude record for jet aircraft, reaching a height of 37,650 meters (123,523 feet). This record was set by Soviet pilot Aleksandr Fedotov on August 31, 1977, using a MiG-25M in a zoom climb. ''

Unfortunately,little is known about the speed record that was achieved six years earlier. It happened during one of the recce flight over Israel in 1971 from the Cairo-West/Egypt airport where Soviet 63rd Independent Aviation Recce Group was stationed. Pilot Lt.Col. Nikolay Stogov ( was at that time OKB MiG test pilot), reached unbelievable real speed of 3.6 Mach. After he landed,avio-mechanics used hammer to break through canopy plexi 'cause it was completely melted from the very high heat ( over 310°C).

''Аварийные случаи были и у пары Стогов – Борщев.
Рассказывает полковник в отставке Николай Борщев:
– В полете нам разрешалось выходить в эфир только в экстренных случаях. Для этого мы должны были сообщить единственное слово – «тринадцать». После этого прекращали выполнение задания и уходили на основной или запасной аэродромы.
Как-то с Николаем Стоговым мы сели в Бени-Суэфе, где базировались наши МиГ-21-е.
Кстати, с Колей мы выполнили по два боевых разведывательных вылета и оба раза садились на этот аэродром. А затем, дозаправившись, на малой высоте уходили на Каир-Вест. Так вот, когда Н.Стогов сел, то не смог долго открыть свой фонарь.
Позже он мне рассказал, что в полете прибор скорости показывал как положено М=2,83, и Николай на этом ограничении и «шпарил». Потом смотрит – дым в кабине.
А дело было над Синаем. Сразу подумал: «Ох, и далеко придется прыгать!». Но как летчик-испытатель разобрался – горел герметик. Довел машину до аэродрома. Техникам пришлось буквально подковыривать его фонарь, чтобы освободить «пленника».
Когда же специалисты на земле проанализировали этот случай, то пришли к выводу, что скорость у самолета была более 3 тыс. км в час – М=3,6! Иначе бы фонарь не приварился.''


''The Stogov-Borshchev pair also had accidents.
Retired Colonel Nikolai Borshchev says:
– During the flight, we were allowed to go on air only in emergency cases. To do this, we had to say a single word – “thirteen”. After that, we stopped the mission and went to the main or alternate airfields.
Once Nikolay Stogov and I landed in Beni Suef, where our MiG-21s were based.
By the way, Kolya and I flew two combat reconnaissance sorties and landed at this airfield both times. And then, after refueling, we flew to Cairo West at low altitude. So, when N. Stogov landed, he couldn't open his canopy for a long time.

Later he told me that during the flight the speed instrument showed M=2.83 as it should be, and Nikolai was “flying” at this limit. Then he looks – there is smoke in the cabin.
And it was over Sinai. I immediately thought: "Oh, I'll have to jump far!" But as the test pilot figured out - the sealant was burning. He brought the machine to the airfield. Technicians had to literally pick at its canopy to free the "prisoner".
When specialists on the ground analyzed this incident, they came to the conclusion that the plane's speed was more than 3 thousand km per hour - M = 3.6! Otherwise, the canopy would not have welded.''

Source: https://testpilot.ru/biblioteka/publikatsii/foxbat/

Reason for this was simple. Although MiG-25's air intake had this so called ''turbulizator'' ,engines R-15B/BD-300 often suffers from the 'self-acceleration' phenomena.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

When specialists on the ground analyzed this incident, they came to the conclusion that the plane's speed was more than 3 thousand km per hour - M = 3.6! Otherwise, the canopy would not have welded.''

Extremely weak 'evidence' for the actual speed achieved. 'Only speeds of Mach 3.6 would cause our sealant to fail' is not 'radar tracked the MiG-25 flying at Mach 3.6'.

 

[F-14ATomcat]

Enough with posts such as this. As commented elsewhere, this forum is focused on technology, not operations. So we don't really need to post every time someone fires a missile, unless there is something different or interesting about it from a technical perspective.

I disagree, the proof or hard evidence of kills it is very small, most are claims, those videos are hard proof of historical evidence, basically are not propaganda but real history, if you see it from the historical point of view, those are real facts, in fact I was born in 1971, in my 54 years of being reading about the MiG-25, well less years since I learnt to read English at 11 years old, I never saw historical evidence of MiG-25 kills until very recently, 10 years ago I saw the Lebanon war video, where the MiG-25 was downed, until Squirrel@ identified as a MiG-25 downed in 1982 I was not sure.

About the one of Iran, thanks to AI I could find the video 4 days ago!, I mean google translator and youtube automatic translation.

In my childhood, the Iran Iraq war news were very general, but in Iran and Iraq the news were aired on TV, however few really watched those news in the 1980s outside Iraq or Iran, nevertheless these news aired in Iran or Iraq were with more details, now in 2025 we can see videos from different countries and of different ages. we live in times historians can enjoy more.

Operational service reflects the technology effectiveness for example I have seen a few videos of Su-20 or MiG-23BN downed, it reflects their technology was not good enough to avoid been downed, same applies to the Tornado and Harrier in gulf war I and even Su-34 in current operations.

Attack aircraft are relatively easy to down even by AAA.

Regards

 

[F-14ATomcat]

Extremely weak 'evidence' for the actual speed achieved. 'Only speeds of Mach 3.6 would cause our sealant to fail' is not 'radar tracked the MiG-25 flying at Mach 3.6'.

Many Russian sources quote speeds achieved in very rare occasions, I mean they were not operational conditions, according to a video I watched a few days ago, the MiG-25 flew at Mach 2.83 only a few minutes, then needed to reduce speed quickly, then again it could re-accelerate to Mach 2.83 for few minutes more but it could not sustain those speeds for long.

So if ever achieved Mach 3.6 was for very few minutes perhaps even seconds, it is not unbelievable it reached that speed, but what is not believable is that it kept flying at those speeds for long, in that the SR-71 was superior but since it used titanium, well it was harder to make, so the MiG-25 was easier to make but it never was able to keep high speeds for long time. only a few bursts and dashes, then it had to fly at Mach 2.3 as supersonic cruise speed.

this video says about the speed limits

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag9ocYPEET0

you can watch the video from minute 24 and it says there about its max speeds

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Many Russian sources quote speeds achieved in very rare occasions, I mean they were not operational conditions, according to a video I watched a few days ago, the MiG-25 flew at Mach 2.83 only a few minutes, then needed to reduce speed quickly, then again it could re-accelerate to Mach 2.83 for few minutes more but it could not sustain those speeds for long.

So if ever achieved Mach 3.6 was for very few minutes perhaps even seconds, it is not unbelievable it reached that speed, but what is not believable is that it kept flying at those speeds for long, in that the SR-71 was superior but since it used titanium, well it was harder to make, so the MiG-25 was easier to make but it never was able to keep high speeds for long time. only a few bursts and dashes, then it had to fly at Mach 2.3 as supersonic cruise speed.

this video says about the speed limits

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ag9ocYPEET0

you can watch the video from minute 24 and it says there about its max speeds

PLEASE STOP WITH ENDLESS POSTS OF YOUTUBE VIDEOS AS SOURCES.

If you want me to view from 24th minute, leave a link to the 24th minute. Like so:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=1440&v=ag9ocYPEET0

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

So, in actual real sources:

Forumavia.ru - Максимальная скорость МиГ-25 в реальном полете

A discussion in Russian including MiG-25/31 test pilot A.Garnaev (А.Гарнаев) concludes it was possible for a pilot to exceed Mach 2.83 up to Mach 3.0 or so, but it was dangerous and not recommended in service use. Directional stability was reduced and risked engine unstarts as the intake ingested turbulent air from the nose. The canopy was a weak point, especially the sealant, and Mach 2.83 limit was 3 mins, so hitting Mach 3.0 would be fleeting at best.

Mach 3.6 is a fantasy.

 

[Flyaway]

Mustard: The Iraqi Ambush America Never Talks About:

View: https://youtu.be/5RtwFbSeV5Y

 

[F-14ATomcat]

So, in actual real sources:

Forumavia.ru - Максимальная скорость МиГ-25 в реальном полете

A discussion in Russian including MiG-25/31 test pilot A.Garnaev (А.Гарнаев) concludes it was possible for a pilot to exceed Mach 2.83 up to Mach 3.0 or so, but it was dangerous and not recommended in service use. Directional stability was reduced and risked engine unstarts as the intake ingested turbulent air from the nose. The canopy was a weak point, especially the sealant, and Mach 2.83 limit was 3 mins, so hitting Mach 3.0 would be fleeting at best.

Mach 3.6 is a fantasy.

If you cared to watch the video, they said the same thing, I can stop the videos but let me tell you this point.

There are good and bad videos, but the same are websites, however some websites do not offer you the video image, which is important many times to see something from a more realistic point.

The Mach 3.6 speed I said if ever, which meant I have no source to say it could or not.

Materials do not melt right away, is not in an instant unless it is a very high temperature, but the aircraft is flying, friction then is also not going to heat up as fast, instantly for example you can touch something very hot a few seconds a do not get burnt, I meant very few seconds.

Same are materials, the fusion point is not in an instant, the MiG-25 can surpass Mach 3, with high risks of damage but like all in life also depends how long it is exposed.

With this I am not saying it went Mach 3.6, but it is well known it flew at Mach 3.2 over Israel but the engines were damaged so the question is not if it can but if it is advisable? of course not.




About the videos you have to consider these days TV is not used by the younger generation, so TV channels with good interviews are already on videos from youtube.

Websites with written content might have more details, and so are books, but videos are sometimes much better than written documents if they have real factual facts.

Specially historical events and even studying materials, I have learn much better watching videos on youtube about math for example the tangent secant theorem in a video from youtube than in a website with written content.

I can stop posting videos but consider we are living in an age a lot of the information is visual and in history well I prefer to see a video of a MiG-25 kill than reading claims that generalize but offer no evidence that can easily become propaganda.

Another advantage of videos is they reduced a large number of pages of written content to few minutes of spoken language and youtube offers translation and subtitles, which in historical content or even news about technical details offer easier understanding.

 

[DWG]

Another advantage of videos is they reduced a large number of pages of written content to few minutes of spoken language and youtube offers translation and subtitles, which in historical content or even news about technical details offer easier understanding.

But do they precis the text accurately, or according to the content creator's personal biases? The nature of the youtube algorithm drives content creators towards gosh-wow presentation that may not reflect the actual facts, or leads them to present extraordinarily rare occurrences as everyday. Unless they're well-known names, we don't have any indication of their typical reliability.

 

[Squirrel]

Extremely weak 'evidence' for the actual speed achieved. 'Only speeds of Mach 3.6 would cause our sealant to fail' is not 'radar tracked the MiG-25 flying at Mach 3.6'.

Ground/aerial radars can not give the real ( true air speed) but only instrumental( radar) speed measured in km/h.True air speed is the ratio of the speed of sound to the speed of the aircraft at a given flight altitude and is measured in Mach number.

''самый быстрый в мире пилотируемый боевой самолёт МИГ-25

Рекорд поставлен Николаем Стоговым на МиГ-25, 66 км/м, или 3960 км/ч. на територии воздушного пространства Израиля

1. Инцидент происходил не во время испытаний, а во время войны.
2. Самолёт выполнен не только из стали, но и из титана.
3. Обшивка действительно нагрелась до 400 градусов, так что даже краска с опознавательными знаками сгорела.
4. Герметик кабины начал плавиться, не отрицаю, и её потом открывали ломами.
5. Лётчики, а их было 2, как и самолётов, оба преодолели порог скорости в 3600 км/час, за што и получили от командования официальный выговор за превышение скоростного барьера в 3 маха.

На испытаниях МиГ-25 ведущими летчиками в нашемОКБ были Вадим Петров, Александр Бежевец, Норик Казарян, Николай Стогов, Игорь Лесников. Лично я сделал мало полетов - всего десять. Наши летчики Стогов, Бежевец летали в Египет. Первый полет над Израилем на высоте 22000 метров выполнил Стогов.''

Transl:

''the world's fastest manned combat aircraft MIG-25

The record was set by Nikolay Stogov on a MiG-25, 66 km/m, or 3960 km/h. in Israeli airspace,

1. The incident did not occur during testing, but during the war.
2. The plane is made not only of steel, but also of titanium.
3. The skin really did heat up to 400 degrees, so even the paint with identification marks burned off.
4. The cabin sealant began to melt, I don’t deny it, and then they opened it with crowbars.
5. The pilots, and there were two of them, as well as the planes, both exceeded the speed threshold of 3600 km/h, for which they received an official reprimand from the command for exceeding the speed barrier of 3 Mach.

During the MiG-25 tests, the leading pilots in our design bureau were Vadim Petrov, Alexander Bezhevets, Norik Kazaryan, Nikolay Stogov, Igor Lesnikov. Personally, I made few flights - only ten. Our pilots Stogov and Bezhevets flew to Egypt. Stogov made the first flight over Israel at an altitude of 22,000 meters.''

Sorry but source link does not work any more.

Besides N.Stogov another two pilots flew with the real speed above 3 Mach : A.Bezhevets and Krasnogorsky.

From the Book of Practical Aerodynamics of the MiG-25RB :

https://www.airwar.ru/other/bibl/mig-25rb_aero.html

We can see that in the case of the full flight energy, MiG-25RB can reach true air speed in the range 3-3.5 Mach on the given altitude.

63-й отдельный авиаотряд советских ВВС в Египте, 1970-72 гг.

Оригинал взят у m2kozhemyakin в 63-й отдельный авиаотряд советских ВВС в Египте, 1970-72 гг. Завершая рассказ о советской авиагруппе в Египте в 1970-72 годах... Предыдущие истории: 1. Они сражались над Суэцом. Советские и израильские летчики в бою 30.07.1970. 2. Фотоархив 135-го истребительного…

ru-history.livejournal.com

63-й отдельный авиаотряд - Испытатели

Испытатели - 63-й отдельный авиаотряд Боевое применение МиГ-25 в Египте

testpilot.ru

 

[Squirrel]

IAF pilot about MiG-25R/RB...

Loneliness at Mach 3: Interview with a MiG-25 Foxbat pilot​

''What were your first impressions of flying the MiG-25R?

A 20-ton aircraft that carries 20 tons of fuel, flies in the stratosphere, cruises at Mach 2.5 in minimum afterburner and exceeds Mach 3.0 with ease when required – what can one say? It was an awesome aeroplane. The fact that the ventral fuel tank was one MiG-23 [equivalent in fuel] under the belly, speaks for itself.''

LONELINESS AT MACH 3

Interview with Indian Air Force MiG-25 'Foxbat' pilot

hushkit.substack.com

P.S.

Fastest combat jet​

''The fastest combat jet is the Russian Mikoyan MiG-25 fighter (NATO code name `Foxbat'). The reconnaissance `Foxbat-B' has been tracked by radar at about Mach 3.2 (3,395 km/h 2,110 mph). The single-seat `Foxbat-A' has a wing span of 13.95 m 45 ft 9 in, is 23.82 m 78 ft 2 in long and has an estimated maximum take-off weight of 37.4 tonnes 82,500 lb.''

Fastest combat jet

www.guinnessworldrecords.com

Now if the radar or instrumental tracking speed was really about 3400 km/h and MiG-25R/RB flew at alt about 70.000feet ( 21kms) than speed of sound on that height is 1062 km/h? That was true air speed of Mach 3.2

 

[GTX]

I disagree, the proof or hard evidence of kills it is very small, most are claims, those videos are hard proof of historical evidence, basically are not propaganda but real history, if you see it from the historical point of view, those are real facts, in fact I was born in 1971, in my 54 years of being reading about the MiG-25, well less years since I learnt to read English at 11 years old, I never saw historical evidence of MiG-25 kills until very recently, 10 years ago I saw the Lebanon war video, where the MiG-25 was downed, until Squirrel@ identified as a MiG-25 downed in 1982 I was not sure.

About the one of Iran, thanks to AI I could find the video 4 days ago!, I mean google translator and youtube automatic translation.

In my childhood, the Iran Iraq war news were very general, but in Iran and Iraq the news were aired on TV, however few really watched those news in the 1980s outside Iraq or Iran, nevertheless these news aired in Iran or Iraq were with more details, now in 2025 we can see videos from different countries and of different ages. we live in times historians can enjoy more.

Operational service reflects the technology effectiveness for example I have seen a few videos of Su-20 or MiG-23BN downed, it reflects their technology was not good enough to avoid been downed, same applies to the Tornado and Harrier in gulf war I and even Su-34 in current operations.

Attack aircraft are relatively easy to down even by AAA.

Regards

That still doesn't address the primary point that this forum is focused on technology, not operations.

 

[F-14ATomcat]

But do they precis the text accurately, or according to the content creator's personal biases? The nature of the youtube algorithm drives content creators towards gosh-wow presentation that may not reflect the actual facts, or leads them to present extraordinarily rare occurrences as everyday. Unless they're well-known names, we don't have any indication of their typical reliability.

you are generalizing, for example yesterday me and my sons were watching a chemistry youtube video about the hydrogen, the information is accurate, the experiments real and the information you can verify it in other sources.

So that is a reliable source, same in History, tell me how many websites show real events better than a video of 15 or 20 minutes length?

I have watched videos of the Iran-Iraq war from Iranian or Iraqi sources that showed me more evidence of actual kills of MiG-25s, F-4s, MiG-23s or Su-22s.

So I consider them better sources than many websites since a lot of the information from the 1980s was from TV, specially TV from Iran or Iraq that had easy access to the combat zone.

So you can not generalize.

 

[F-14ATomcat]

That still doesn't address the primary point that this forum is focused on technology, not operations.

that is an Oxymoron, since a weapon shows its technical aspects in combat, what this forum tries to avoid is politics and false information, that is totally different to what you mention.

The MiG-25 is a weapon, if it was downed by Iranian or Israeli SAMs in the 1980s tell me what does it say about its technology?

About its technical aspects? easy the MiG-25 is fast but it can not turn well, you can justify why it can not turn well due to structure, speed, centrifugal force, tangent of the formula for turning or what ever but the proof is a picture of a MiG-25 wreckage killed by an Iranian SAM.

This shows its chaff and flares and EW did not work well.

So I differ, we should avoid politics but operations in military machines show its technical aspects better.

 

[F-14ATomcat]

View attachment 782073

https://www.airwar.ru/other/bibl/mig-25rb_aero.html

We can see that in the case of the full flight energy, MiG-25RB can reach true air speed in the range 3-3.5 Mach on the given altitude.

63-й отдельный авиаотряд советских ВВС в Египте, 1970-72 гг.

Оригинал взят у m2kozhemyakin в 63-й отдельный авиаотряд советских ВВС в Египте, 1970-72 гг. Завершая рассказ о советской авиагруппе в Египте в 1970-72 годах... Предыдущие истории: 1. Они сражались над Суэцом. Советские и израильские летчики в бою 30.07.1970. 2. Фотоархив 135-го истребительного…

ru-history.livejournal.com

63-й отдельный авиаотряд - Испытатели

Испытатели - 63-й отдельный авиаотряд Боевое применение МиГ-25 в Египте

testpilot.ru

thanks i can read a bit russian and while I can not read well or speak it I understand your graph a bit, it says speed at altitude and has Mach Mach 3 and Mach 3.4 or 3.5.

airwar.ru has several manuals, good Russian website, it also has many of Babich`s combat accounts

 

[DWG]

you are generalizing,

Absolutely, because Content Creators tend to be presenters, not researchers. It's the nature of the beast. There are youtubers who do the primary research, or who are experts in their field, but they're swamped by the amateurs who just want big subscriber counts.

I have watched videos of the Iran-Iraq war from Iranian or Iraqi sources that showed me more evidence of actual kills of MiG-25s, F-4s, MiG-23s or Su-22s.

So I consider them better sources than many websites since a lot of the information from the 1980s was from TV, specially TV from Iran or Iraq that had easy access to the combat zone.

Without independent verification, I'd trust a news source from Saddam's Iraq about as far as I could comfortably throw it. As for Iran, well, we've all seen the Qaher F-313 ....

 

[F-14ATomcat]

Absolutely, because Content Creators tend to be presenters, not researchers. It's the nature of the beast. There are youtubers who do the primary research, or who are experts in their field, but they're swamped by the amateurs who just want big subscriber counts.


Without independent verification, I'd trust a news source from Saddam's Iraq about as far as I could comfortably throw it. As for Iran, well, we've all seen the Qaher F-313 ....

Sorry but you did not understand me, the videos for example showed Su-22, MiG-23 or MiG-25 downed and the video are old, so you can doubt whatever but you are not right, the video are real not fictitious, they are old, they show the Su-22 or MiG-25s downed.

All people are presenters, you just are claiming your self an authority. I can say the same about you, you are presenter, but the fact is several sources show the evidence and tell me why in 2025 an old video of some Iranian troops around an old Su-22 will be false when it is actual footage of the 1980s? sorry you are giving your self too much credit, you are a presenter too, a researcher is also a presenter too because theories are opinions and are also biased.

What makes something real or factual is not opinions but the reality it self, in few words when something gives the same result every time is factual, opinions are not important, reality imposes over opinions.

The downing of the MiG-25 over Isfahan was accepted by both Iran and Iraq and I have shown you an Iraqi source and Iranian source but I am sure you did not see they are in different languages one is in Farsi the other in Arabic.

 

[DWG]

Sorry but you did not understand me, the videos for example showed Su-22, MiG-23 or MiG-25 downed and the video are old, so you can doubt whatever but you are not right, the video are real not fictitious, they are old, they show the Su-22 or MiG-25s downed.

They may show aircraft downed, but does the narrative reflect the actual circumstances? Was it a shoot down, mechanical failure, controlled flight into terrain, a manoeuvering kill, bird strike, or what? There's considerable nuance that pictures of a wreck don't reflect. (Over and above whether the type involved was what is being claimed, and whether that's contemporary footage or archive footage from an unconnected incident).

And then there's the nature of the reporter/media. I don't trust the BBC to be 100% accurate on civilian aircrashes in the UK, simply because their reporters aren't aviation specialists. Shift that amateur element over to a media highly influenced by the Ba'ath Party (Iraq) or the IRGC (Iraq) and the likely reliability of the report outside of independent verification plummets further.

All people are presenters, you just are claiming your self an authority.

I'm an authority talking about some areas of avionics, outside of that I'm an enthusiastic amateur. But there's a difference between an amateur citing and cross-checking authoritative primary sources and one taking everything he sees from secondary sources on trust.

tell me why in 2025 an old video of some Iranian troops around an old Su-22 will be false when it is actual footage of the 1980s?

First question? Is it even an Su-22? If national markings are visible then it could be an Su-20 or Su-7, all in use by Iraq at the time (footage of the wing pivot could rule out the Su-7). If no national markings are visible, it could also be an Su-17, with the footage from elsewhere. Second question, are the troops identifiably Iranian? National insignia could potentially identify them, fatigues and small arms are not 100% unless you get close enough to read insignia - ex-US style helmets, fatigues and G3 assault rifles is not a sufficiently unique combination.

Could everything be as presented? Yes, maybe. But it's the maybe that's the issue and that you can't ignore.

The downing of the MiG-25 over Isfahan was accepted by both Iran and Iraq

There we are, independent verification.

 

[Squirrel]

^^^

Sorry for interrupting ...About that MiG-25RBT that was shot down over Isfahan in Feb 1987.

''Ирак признал боевую потерю лишь одного МиГ-25 в модификации разведчика/бомбардировщика, 25 февраля 1987 года над Исфаханом МиГ-25РБ во время атаки нефтяных объектов был сбит иранским ЗРК HQ-2 (С-75), пилот лейтенант Сайер Собхи Ахмад катапультировался и был взят в плен.''


''Iraq has admitted the combat loss of only one MiG-25 reconnaissance/bomber modification; on February 25, 1987, over Isfahan, a MiG-25RB was shot down by an Iranian HQ-2 (C-75) SAM system during an attack on oil facilities; the pilot, Lieutenant Sayer Sobhi Ahmad, ejected and was taken prisoner.''


'' МиГ-25РБ сбитый 15 февраля 1987 является, фактически, единственной признаной боевой потерей самолетов данной модификации. Он был сбит при атаке нефтяных комплексов Исфахана, ракетой ЗРК HQ-2, в 12:32 местного времени на высоте 65 000 футов. Другие однотипные самолеты по информации ВВС Ирака терялись в результате не боевых причин.''


'' The MiG-25RB shot down on February 15, 1987 is, in fact, the only acknowledged combat loss of aircraft of this modification. It was shot down during an attack on the oil complexes of Isfahan, by a missile from the HQ-2 SAM system, at 12:32 local time at an altitude of 65,000 feet. Other similar aircraft, according to the Iraqi Air Force, were lost as a result of non-combat reasons.''

Source: http://www.skywar.ru/Iraqinc.html

It is interesting to note that IqAF never lost any interceptor MiG-25PDE/PDS/PDSG either during Iraq-Iran war or during the First Gulf war in the air battles.

P.S.

About the max ( practicaly used) speed of the recce MiG-25, in this case BuAF MiG-25RBT ( had that SRS-13 'Tangazh' recce equipment and even SPS-141 ''Geran ECM) ,I will try to find some comments of one member of the MCM forum ( former radar operator/specialist) who wrote about BuAF MiG-25RBT overflies over former SFRY from Bulgaria to Hungary and back to Bulgaria via Romania with tracked instrumental /radar speed of over 3000km/h.He wrote that although former YuAF had interceptors like MiG-29B and some very modern ground based radars ,they could not do anything against high and very fast flying recce BuAF Foxbats.

 

[F-14ATomcat]

They may show aircraft downed, but does the narrative reflect the actual circumstances? Was it a shoot down, mechanical failure, controlled flight into terrain, a manoeuvering kill, bird strike, or what? There's considerable nuance that pictures of a wreck don't reflect. (Over and above whether the type involved was what is being claimed, and whether that's contemporary footage or archive footage from an unconnected incident).

And then there's the nature of the reporter/media. I don't trust the BBC to be 100% accurate on civilian aircrashes in the UK, simply because their reporters aren't aviation specialists. Shift that amateur element over to a media highly influenced by the Ba'ath Party (Iraq) or the IRGC (Iraq) and the likely reliability of the report outside of independent verification plummets further.



I'm an authority talking about some areas of avionics, outside of that I'm an enthusiastic amateur. But there's a difference between an amateur citing and cross-checking authoritative primary sources and one taking everything he sees from secondary sources on trust.



First question? Is it even an Su-22? If national markings are visible then it could be an Su-20 or Su-7, all in use by Iraq at the time (footage of the wing pivot could rule out the Su-7). If no national markings are visible, it could also be an Su-17, with the footage from elsewhere. Second question, are the troops identifiably Iranian? National insignia could potentially identify them, fatigues and small arms are not 100% unless you get close enough to read insignia - ex-US style helmets, fatigues and G3 assault rifles is not a sufficiently unique combination.

Could everything be as presented? Yes, maybe. But it's the maybe that's the issue and that you can't ignore.



There we are, independent verification.

I am not trying to belittle you, definitively, we all should respect each other.

A Su-20 downed in 1986, displayed on Iranian TV

My point was I have watched several videos, the AAA is firing or missiles hitting their targets plus both sides accepted the kill of the MiG-25 and the pilot was captured and paraded in Iranian TV in the 1980s, so here you have to admit the quality of the videos is good, one shows the wreckage and pilot captured, the Farsi one from Iran, and the Iraqi says their version but admits the loss of the MiG-25 and the fact it was downed plus accepts the Iraqi pilot was captured.

So the quality of most videos i saw are good, regardless you want to put the bar high or not.

In that i do not agree with you, but you have the right to doubt it.

 

[F-14ATomcat]

^^^

Sorry for interrupting ...About that MiG-25RBT that was shot down over Isfahan in Feb 1987.

''Ирак признал боевую потерю лишь одного МиГ-25 в модификации разведчика/бомбардировщика, 25 февраля 1987 года над Исфаханом МиГ-25РБ во время атаки нефтяных объектов был сбит иранским ЗРК HQ-2 (С-75), пилот лейтенант Сайер Собхи Ахмад катапультировался и был взят в плен.''


''Iraq has admitted the combat loss of only one MiG-25 reconnaissance/bomber modification; on February 25, 1987, over Isfahan, a MiG-25RB was shot down by an Iranian HQ-2 (C-75) SAM system during an attack on oil facilities; the pilot, Lieutenant Sayer Sobhi Ahmad, ejected and was taken prisoner.''


'' МиГ-25РБ сбитый 15 февраля 1987 является, фактически, единственной признаной боевой потерей самолетов данной модификации. Он был сбит при атаке нефтяных комплексов Исфахана, ракетой ЗРК HQ-2, в 12:32 местного времени на высоте 65 000 футов. Другие однотипные самолеты по информации ВВС Ирака терялись в результате не боевых причин.''


'' The MiG-25RB shot down on February 15, 1987 is, in fact, the only acknowledged combat loss of aircraft of this modification. It was shot down during an attack on the oil complexes of Isfahan, by a missile from the HQ-2 SAM system, at 12:32 local time at an altitude of 65,000 feet. Other similar aircraft, according to the Iraqi Air Force, were lost as a result of non-combat reasons.''

Source: http://www.skywar.ru/Iraqinc.html

It is interesting to note that IqAF never lost any interceptor MiG-25PDE/PDS/PDSG either during Iraq-Iran war or during the First Gulf war in the air battles.

P.S.

About the max ( practicaly used) speed of the recce MiG-25, in this case BuAF MiG-25RBT ( had that SRS-13 'Tangazh' recce equipment and even SPS-141 ''Geran ECM) ,I will try to find some comments of one member of the MCM forum ( former radar operator/specialist) who wrote about BuAF MiG-25RBT overflies over former SFRY from Bulgaria to Hungary and back to Bulgaria via Romania with tracked instrumental /radar speed of over 3000km/h.He wrote that although former YuAF had interceptors like MiG-29B and some very modern ground based radars ,they could not do anything against high and very fast flying recce BuAF Foxbats.

Iraq also claims their MiG-25s downed an F-15 in 1991