Soviet high supersonic /hypersonic aircraft ?

L

lancer21

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
9 January 2010
Messages
877
Reaction score
971
I always wondered, did they had such a program in the 50s and 60s and beyond?Did they intended to built high speed experimental manned aircraft , like the X-15 for instance?( if they did its damn secret , because i dont remember seeing anything anywhere so far) ? I did saw the topic about the TsAGI supersonic and hypersonic testbeds, but did they physically flew faster than they did in the Mig-25? Any recent info on the subject?

Thanks alot!

( BTW does the name S-88 meen anything to you ?)
 
The Soviet Myasishchev OKB had plans to develop the RSS-52, which would of had a manned and unmanned version. The RSS-52, based on the M-44, would have been flown under the B-50/52 Bounder bomber and air launched to conduct hypersonic research. However, the cost, technical challenges, and the lack of political support for the OKB's RSS-52 project saw that it never flew. Other unmanned high speed research platforms were developed and flown.

A Soviet equivelant to the US High Speed Research Program that created the X-series of aircraft may have been the early rivalry between the Bisnovat and Roessing design teams with the Samolyot 5 and the Project 346 rocket aircraft of the late 1940's.

This was followed by unmanned cruise missile designs and a manned variant of the M-42/44 (RSS-52), cancelled around 1957. But again, no manned hypersonic system. After the Soviets found themselves falling behind in this area there was an effort to develop a two phase program to fly an atmospheric high-altitude-high-speed aircraft, followed by an exoatmospheric X-15 type vehicle to develop ballistic controls, materials, cockpit systems, etc. This was known as the M-48. Again technical problems and politics dismissed this program.

The Soviets go on to design vehicles such as the PKA and the Spiral, which were responses to Dynasoar and and the US manned lifting bodies (M1-F1, X-24A/B, HL-10, etc.).

I think the reasons for the failure to develop an X-15 type, manned system began with Soviet political infighting and secrecy leading to OKB technical compartmentalization, a lack of a coherent and a consectutive plan to develop technologies, and the lack of an authoritive body to coordinate programs, similar to the US NASA. I'm not familiar with the S-88. Sukhoi is the only "S" airframe manufacturer (Soloviev and Shvetsov OKBs are engine manufacturers), that I know of, and there are no S-88 Soviet missiles. Could be a university design?
 
Perhaps of interest is a Report 'Soviet Hypersonics R&D: Applications to Civil and Military Aviation' available from http://www.foia.cia.gov/search.asp.

There is quite a lot of redaction of course though...

There's also a photograph of a (60's looking) delta-wing aircraft I can't identify on Page 10?, implied as Soviet, although it is a very poor quality reproduction....
 
mr_london_247 said:
Perhaps of interest is a Report 'Soviet Hypersonics R&D: Applications to Civil and Military Aviation' available from http://www.foia.cia.gov/search.asp.

There is quite a lot of redaction of course though...

There's also a photograph of a (60's looking) delta-wing aircraft I can't identify on Page 10?, implied as Soviet, although it is a very poor quality reproduction....
Click to expand...

All I can say is that the delta wing design on page ten looks anything but hypersonic. It looks like a twin engine Vulcan bomber to me. Of course, maybe it was some sort of carrier/launcher aircraft?

What I found interesting was further down in the article where it wrote about MiG designing a follow on to the MiG-31 to counter a reported U.S. manned Mach 4 to Mach 5 aircraft. I suppose that was probably the MiG-301?
 
The follow-on was the MiG 7.01. The 301 or whatever was a MiG reconnaissance project for a potentially hypersonic platform with VG wings.
 
Regarding this "S-88"...well please dont laugh , i have asked about it because looooong time ago i was reading this RO book , called Modern Aviation( Aviatia moderna ) 1977 edition, huge 870 page book and there was a chapter there about hypersonic aircraft and research , they mentioned the X-15 , and lifting bodies , and various concepts of the day, all kind of stuff ...dont get me wrong , probably most of that info must have been taken from various western , aswell as russian books and periodicals , there was a truly impressive bibliography at the end ...

My memory might be wrong , and i might be mixing stuff, but when they were talking about the X-15 ,and the speeds it achieved , and the heating and all that , there was this little line , just a sentence, about this SOVIET hypersonic aircraft ( they dont say manned or not , it could be anything !) who reached or was suposed to reach an even bigger speed, and if my memory isnt really messed up ( again its been very long i was a kid then), there was something with "88" in it , i had the feeling it was "S" but could be something else ...

Now i know that some of you might laugh at my "source" , i wish i had that book now , i cant even remember if i have it back home or not!

Are there any romanians here that might help ? ???

Still , after a quick search on the net , it turns out theres is /was a NII-88 institute in Soviet Union , and they WERE involved , among other things , in hypersonic research in the 50s and 60s!

Encyclopedia Astronautica Index: 1

www.astronautix.com www.astronautix.com

Wiki


Thank you all for your replies and links here , most interesting reads!
 
SOC said:
The follow-on was the MiG 7.01. The 301 or whatever was a MiG reconnaissance project for a potentially hypersonic platform with VG wings.
Click to expand...

I know the MiG 7.01 is the MiG-31 follow on usually referred to, but it wasn't anywhere near fast enough to intercept a Mach 4 to 5 aircraft. That's why I suggest the MiG 3.01, since it was designed to be much faster than the 7.01.
 
Why couldn't the 7.01 hit a hypersonic target?
 
It'd need hypersonic missiles, wouldn't it?

Dynoman said:
I think the reasons for the failure to develop an X-15 type, manned system began with Soviet political infighting and secrecy leading to OKB technical compartmentalization, a lack of a coherent and a consectutive plan to develop technologies, and the lack of an authoritive body to coordinate programs, similar to the US NASA. I'm not familiar with the S-88. Sukhoi is the only "S" airframe manufacturer (Soloviev and Shvetsov OKBs are engine manufacturers), that I know of, and there are no S-88 Soviet missiles. Could be a university design?
Click to expand...

Lack of funding may also have been an issue. The United States had lots of funds to spare in the 20th century (earlier industrialisation, despoiling a continent which was largely without civilisations, not fighting any wars on its own soil etc.)
 
Wouldn't the missiles need to be faster than hypersonic to intercept a hypersonic target?


Avimimus said:
It'd need hypersonic missiles, wouldn't it?

Dynoman said:
I think the reasons for the failure to develop an X-15 type, manned system began with Soviet political infighting and secrecy leading to OKB technical compartmentalization, a lack of a coherent and a consectutive plan to develop technologies, and the lack of an authoritive body to coordinate programs, similar to the US NASA. I'm not familiar with the S-88. Sukhoi is the only "S" airframe manufacturer (Soloviev and Shvetsov OKBs are engine manufacturers), that I know of, and there are no S-88 Soviet missiles. Could be a university design?
Click to expand...

Lack of funding may also have been an issue. The United States had lots of funds to spare in the 20th century (earlier industrialisation, despoiling a continent which was largely without civilisations, not fighting any wars on its own soil etc.)
Click to expand...
 
SOC said:
Why couldn't the 7.01 hit a hypersonic target?
Click to expand...

Besides requiring a missile that could catch it, if they aren't able to make a pure intercept/collision course engagement, I don't see a Mach 2.5 aircraft intercepting a Mach 4 to 5 aircraft anymore than we saw Mach 2 aircraft intercepting Mach 3+ Blackbirds.
 
MiG-31s made visual contact with SR-71s on more than one occasion. The Blackbird was not invincible, just smart enough to either 1) stay in international airspace, or 2) only fly within range of less capable SAM systems like the S-75, S-125, and S-200. Russian pilots describing visual intercepts does destroy the unintelligent fanboyism that is widely propagated that claims the Blackbird never flew near areas with FOXHOUNDs, for the record! Yefim Gordon also claims that FOXBAT pilots received "launch" indicators while intercepting Blackbirds, indicating that they could've shot at one had the order been given. His stuff should be taken with a grain of salt, though, as he'll print anything that fits within his obvious anti-Western bias.

With the right weapon system it would be possible to shoot down a hypersonic aircraft. Plotting a head-on aspect collision-course type of intercept wouldn't be monumentally difficult either, given the obscene unmaneuverability of anything travelling at those velocities. Reaction time would be the only serious concern, provided you had a capable weapon system.
 
7.01 was designed for long range and sustained high supercruise type speeds. Provided you got a hypersonic bomber launch indication from long range OTH-B type radars (or spies near the home airbase), and launch in roughly the right direction, you should be fine. Couple with R-37/KS-172 type missiles and big kickass radars with cooperative datalinks on the 7.01s, it ought to be feasible.
 
SOC said:
MiG-31s made visual contact with SR-71s on more than one occasion.
Click to expand...

As I recall they were from somewhat below. (Not beyond missile range of course.) One thing I wonder about those incidents is were the Blackbirds going slow or something? I wouldn't think a Mig-31 could touch Mach 3.2 with weapons (or without them for that matter).
 
I was under the impression that the SR-71s were cruising in these cases. However, a catch by a Mig-31 isn't impossible. The Mig is a high energy fighter with missiles that have excellent ballistic performance and reasonably high terminal speed. So long as it was a front quarter attack there is nothing ruling it out.

The interesting thing about high speed flight is that it becomes a simple matter of energy performance. Flying at high altitude there is no terrain masking and aircraft develop large heat signatures. It becomes a simple matter of numbers, distances, speeds and turn radii (although I'm sure some counter measures could be developed). Sensor ranges also matter of course. Given the expect costs in fuel, I wouldn't be surprised if low altitude, lower speed stealthy and much cheaper platforms become the standard. Aircraft like the 3.01 may never see the light of day (or have a fate similar to the XB-70).

Neat designs though.
 
Regarding all of the MiG-31 "intercepts" I've read about, the Foxhounds shadowed the Blackbirds, which tells me the Blackbirds were flying well below their top speed. In fact, in many of the cases, I'm willing to bet it was being done intentionally to gather information on the Foxhounds themselves; response time, frequencies used, RADAR performance, etc.

We didn't fly over Russia with Blackbirds because we agreed not to do so. It does not mean we could not have done so. The Blackbird had an excellent ECM suite and I seriously doubt the Blackbird pilots were ever really afraid of the Foxhound.
 
Blackbirds did have a state of the art ESM/ECM suite, but that doesn't mean that a Mach 3 or faster aircraft wouldn't physically be able to be shot down.

FOXHOUND could hit Mach 2.83, and do it with four R-33s.
 
sferrin said:
I wouldn't think a Mig-31 could touch Mach 3.2 with weapons (or without them for that matter).
Click to expand...

Not 3.2 without weapons, but i have heard about 3.1, from a Foxhound pilot.
 
Sundog said:
All I can say is that the delta wing design on page ten looks anything but hypersonic. It looks like a twin engine Vulcan bomber to me. Of course, maybe it was some sort of carrier/launcher aircraft?
Click to expand...

Indeed, the closest I can find to it is the http://www.testpilot.ru/russia/myasishchev/m/32/m32.htm, however it still doesn't look quite right. The reference on Page 7 to Figure 3 implies Soviet research from the late 50's. Perhaps an esteemed member from the east can identify?
 
Regarding the original question about 1950s-60s projects there were the Tupolev Tu-130, Tu-136 and Tu-139 (http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,220.msg78519.html#msg78519).

On later, 1980s projects, I've myself sometimes wondered whether the MiG 3.01 was the best the Soviets had in that size class, or could there be some still unknown Mach 5+ "secret projects"? The Tupolev Tu-2000 et al. of course, but what about smaller, interceptor-sized craft that the USA had plenty of designs of?
 
Meteorit said:
Regarding the original question about 1950s-60s projects there were the Tupolev Tu-130, Tu-136 and Tu-139 (http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,220.msg78519.html#msg78519).

On later, 1980s projects, I've myself sometimes wondered whether the MiG 3.01 was the best the Soviets had in that size class, or could there be some still unknown Mach 5+ "secret projects"? The Tupolev Tu-2000 et al. of course, but what about smaller, interceptor-sized craft that the USA had plenty of designs of?
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link, I hadn't thought of searching else where here, Doh! That VKS design shows similar design features, IMHO, to the one shown in the document, especially with regard to the cockpit/nose design.
 
Out of curiosity, have any descriptions turned up of counterparts to the SR-71?

Matt
 
Basing their designs on Billig and Waltrup’s earlier DCR work, the Russians developed and flew a hydrogen-fueled scramjet engine utilizing a dump combustor as a pilot and fuel preconditioner (Vinogradev et al., 1990). The engine was mounted on the tip of a Russian SA-5 booster rocket and telemetry data were used to measure the amount of thrust generated by the engine. According to Covault et al. (1992) and Roudakov et al. (1991), the Russians succeeded in flying several short tests with this dual combustor ramjet and achieved powered flight under scramjet operation at a flight speed of Mach 7. Although reports of Russian advancements are not easily accessed, a report by the Air Force Scientific Advisory Board notes that the Russians are “pressing ahead most forcefully” (Covault, 1992).
Click to expand...

A testbed ref of course, but still:

VTechWorks Home

scholar.lib.vt.edu scholar.lib.vt.edu
 
"Hypersonic Weapons Technology for the Time Critical Ground Mobile Threat" (http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a361137.pdf):

The Russians, like the U.S., have experimented with Mach 3+ aircraft and cruise missile designs dating back to the early 1950s. They began work on a ramjet-powered delta-wing configuration and conducted a flight test in 1957. In the early 1990s, the Russians began conducting tests of hydrogen-fueled ramjet/scramjet engines as part of a high-speed flight program designed to investigate Mach 5-7 systems for commercial transports, a single-stage-to-orbit spaceplane, and more probable, hypersonic cruise missiles. It has been reported, in November 1991 a test was conducted at a military installation near the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan where a scramjet/ramjet vehicle was launched from atop an obsolete ground-to-airmissile. The mission was believed to have lasted about 130 seconds and may have achieved a speed of Mach 8.
Click to expand...
 
Being often mistakenly attributed as MiG MFI inlet study photo, actually it's Mach 4-5 [military] aircraft inlet tests from 80s
 

Attachments

  • TsAGI-M4-5-inlet_wt.jpg
    TsAGI-M4-5-inlet_wt.jpg
    609.5 KB · Views: 52
  • TsAGI-M4-5-inlet.jpg
    TsAGI-M4-5-inlet.jpg
    790.7 KB · Views: 55

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom