Iraqi 'Mach 3' MiG Buried in Sand (Charles Smith)

NewsMax.com ^ | August 6, 2003 | Charles Smith

[kayak]

bttt

[Blood of Tyrants]

F-14 did a max of about Mach 2.1.

[StriperSniper]

I seem to remember readng that it can exceed Mach 3 for short periods of time, but then need the engines totally rebuilt. Since they were built to intercept bombers with nukes, you either got the job done, or it didn't matter anymore.

[ASA Vet]

Ok, amaze me with some examples.

[Tijeras_Slim]

I know Russian fighter's engines are supposedly less susceptible to foreign object damage (fod), but this is a bit much!

[HighRoadToChina]

I do know an Iraqi who is well connected. FRemail me who you are and what you would like to do in Iraqi as an archeologist and I'll forward the info to him.

[DannyTN]

"What does the head of your average liberal and a Mig-25 have in common...? Looking at the picture, I started to say "a point". But that just can't be right. What point does a liberal have?

[Semper Paratus]

I don't think the MiG-25 can go Mach 3.

The one they found isn't going to hit Mach .00003

[js1138]

It's got to be embarrassing to have one of your best dug out of the sand intact. Might be refurbished to give the guys at Top Gun some fun.

Maybe that's one of the reasons the Ruskies didn't want to play.

[Quilla]

I've heard the combination used once before - slightly different context.

"Although sophisticated listening devices were available, the Russian government was able to secure phone sex tapes of President Clinton and Monica Lewinsky with standard surveillance equipment. Many great guffaws were shared over a glass of chilled vodka."

[CCCV]

I don't think the MiG-25 can go Mach 3.
When I was in the USAF there was a scare about this aircraft because it was clocked at Mach3 somewhere in the middle east. (If my memory is correct it was Egypt) A little while after we got the report that it in fact had been clocked at mach3 but that it was a result of something called afterburner run-on and the aircraft came apart. I understand the principle but not being a jet engine guy, I never understood why they couldn't just shut off the fuel. Anyway, I have no idea it it was true or not, but it was told through official channels.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Interesting story here. In the mid 1980's the US military scoffed at the Soviet's use of miniturazed vacuum tubes in their equipment until someone pointed out that vacuum tubes are immune from an electromagnetic pulse.

[Pyro7480]

See post #32. There seems to be debate over its top speed.

[Sparta]

AT-14 Kornet E, responsible for the destruction of at least one maybe two Abrams tanks in Operation Iraqi Freedom

[AMNZ]

Surely this was an authorized armament, not an undisclosed acquisition from Russia.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Mabybe they can find some newer toys to play with. Maybe some MiG-29's. Yea! That would be the bomb!

[Spruce]

Not destroyed. Disabled.

[Snake Eater]

The Foxbat was designed to do Mach 2.8, but they set a redline of Mach 2.5 as any faster caused damage to the engines. US radar once tracked one over Israel at just over Mach 3. When it landed in Egypt its engines were total losses.

[Pyro7480]

This sounds sort of like the scare involving early Soviet nuclear subs. There was an incident where an aircraft carrier was being tracked by a Soviet sub, and the sub was able to keep up with the carrier, which was going 30+ knots. The only reason that they were able to go that fast was because the Soviet shipbuilders cut back on radiation shielding, and because of that, many of the sailors who served on such subs got cancer.