Was there ever a "Blackbird-ski" project?

[Kryptid]

I don't know if my fellow Russian members would consider it offensive to tag Soviet/Russian aircraft programs as "fill-in-the-blank-ski" (i.e. "teen-ski" and "Raptor-ski"), but it's certainly not my intention with this thread.

My question here regards any hypothetical Russian counterpart to the A-12/YF-12/SR-71 series of aircraft. Were there ever any designs (even on the drawing board) for a similar concept? A reconnaissance/interceptor aircraft designed to fly at 80,000 feet or more and cruise at Mach 3+? Or were the MiG-25 and MiG-31 types considered "close enough" to that goal not to warrant such a design effort? Would the MiG 7.01 have been close?

 

[RyanC]

There was the Tsybin series of aircraf that were very functionally similar. (e.g. RSR etc)

Wiki on RSR

 

[Jd_Sec]

The interesting thing is that the RSR was in development in the early-50s before the development of the A-12/YF-12/SR-71 even began. If it had actually been put into service, it would have been a great threat to the A-12 and SR-71.


It's also interesting to note the resemblance between the RSR and A-12/SR-71. It's my speculation that we "took" the RSR design and refined it into the A-12 and SR-71.


I'm sure there were other Soviet "Blackbird" projects in the works but it seems that the Russians/Soviets took other routes in designing their aircraft, so it's a question that may remain unanswered for a long time to come.


It's also interesting to note that the Soviets had various hypersonic projects such as the Sukhoi T-4 Bomber on the drawing board. They seemed to lead in R&D in that area.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

The interesting thing is that the RSR was in development in the early-50s before the development of the A-12/YF-12/SR-71 even began. If it had actually been put into service, it would have been a great threat to the A-12 and SR-71.

It's also interesting to note the resemblance between the RSR and A-12/SR-71. It's my speculation that we "took" the RSR design and refined it into the A-12 and SR-71.

No. Any resemblance is coincidental.


How would RSR have been a great threat to the A-12? If it had been built and worked, it was intended to cruise at Mach 2, not Mach 3.5, and if anything would accelerate US deployment of an analogous but superior system. Technically, there would have been lots of challenges - the D-21 turbofans for starters.

I'm sure there were other Soviet "Blackbird" projects in the works but it seems that the Russians/Soviets took other routes in designing their aircraft, so it's a question that may remain unanswered for a long time to come.

It's also interesting to note that the Soviets had various hypersonic projects such as the Sukhoi T-4 Bomber on the drawing board. They seemed to lead in R&D in that area.

T-4 wasn't hypersonic. It was intended to reach Mach 3, but never exceeded Mach 1.25 in tests. Hypersonic is generally agreed to be Mach 4+.


There were a number of high speed projects just before the breakup of the USSR, like the Mikoyan 301. Never any direct equivalent of the A-12 however.

 

[famvburg]

Hmm. I've always understood hypersonic to start at Mach 5.

 

[sferrin]

Hmm. I've always understood hypersonic to start at Mach 5.

Or even higher (I'd read Mach 6). Seems fashionable today to slap "hypersonic" on as many things as possible though, and to do that one needs to reduce the number wherein something is considered "hypersonic". (Though admittedly it isn't as easily defined as subsonic, transonic, and supersonic.)

 

[Jd_Sec]

No. Any resemblance is coincidental.


How would RSR have been a great threat to the A-12? If it had been built and worked, it was intended to cruise at Mach 2, not Mach 3.5, and if anything would accelerate US deployment of an analogous but superior system. Technically, there would have been lots of challenges - the D-21 turbofans for starters.

Given the timeframe of the RSR and A-12 development, the resemblance is not coincidental. It would make sense as a missing piece to the early A-12 development. Granted, we could have developed the A-12 from the Bristol 188, but it's more likely the CIA got wind of the RSR program and wanted something to match it.


"How would RSR have been a great threat to the A-12?" -- Let's see: the A-12 was designed to be unarmed and the RSR was designed to be armed with a set of missiles and intercept aircraft. Who do you think would have the greater advantage: an armed aircraft designed to intercept and kill or an unarmed reconnaissance platform? According to the information I have about the RSR, it was supposed to operate in the Mach 3+ environment.


Would the US develop a superior analogous system? Maybe, but you have to keep in mind that the US killed off many superior weapon systems in the 1960s such as the YF-12 and XB-70. We went from wanting and developing Mach 3+ aircraft to wanting and developing subsonic multi-role aircraft. I think if Gary Powers hadn't been shot down, then yes we would have developed a superior (analogous) system. The shooting down of Gary Powers, in essence, killed the development of high-mach aircraft along with several other things (the Kennedy administration, Robert MacNamara, Vietnam War).


As far as technical challenges: they would have been overcome. In the 50s/60s the greatest challenge was not science or technology but politics.

 

[sferrin]

No. Any resemblance is coincidental.


How would RSR have been a great threat to the A-12? If it had been built and worked, it was intended to cruise at Mach 2, not Mach 3.5, and if anything would accelerate US deployment of an analogous but superior system. Technically, there would have been lots of challenges - the D-21 turbofans for starters.

Given the timeframe of the RSR and A-12 development, the resemblance is not coincidental. It would make sense as a missing piece to the early A-12 development. Granted, we could have developed the A-12 from the Bristol 188, but it's more likely the CIA got wind of the RSR program and wanted something to match it.

: Go read a few books on the development of the Blackbird.

 

[Matej]

Exactly. Final Blackbird design was chosen from many very different designs as the most optimal. No relation to Soviet/Russian research at all.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1107.msg8921.html#msg8921

 

[Jd_Sec]

: Go read a few books on the development of the Blackbird.

I actually have, thank you very much. But thank you for your consideration ;D

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

RSR was a bomber / recce aircraft.


If this is your level of "research" don't be surprised if you find the site members less than forthcoming on your "theory".


Just a few questions - do you have any facts here? Or is your theory based purely on a supposed resemblance?




Thought so.

 

[famvburg]

Resemblance????

No. Any resemblance is coincidental.


How would RSR have been a great threat to the A-12? If it had been built and worked, it was intended to cruise at Mach 2, not Mach 3.5, and if anything would accelerate US deployment of an analogous but superior system. Technically, there would have been lots of challenges - the D-21 turbofans for starters.

Given the timeframe of the RSR and A-12 development, the resemblance is not coincidental. It would make sense as a missing piece to the early A-12 development. Granted, we could have developed the A-12 from the Bristol 188, but it's more likely the CIA got wind of the RSR program and wanted something to match it.


"How would RSR have been a great threat to the A-12?" -- Let's see: the A-12 was designed to be unarmed and the RSR was designed to be armed with a set of missiles and intercept aircraft. Who do you think would have the greater advantage: an armed aircraft designed to intercept and kill or an unarmed reconnaissance platform? According to the information I have about the RSR, it was supposed to operate in the Mach 3+ environment.


Would the US develop a superior analogous system? Maybe, but you have to keep in mind that the US killed off many superior weapon systems in the 1960s such as the YF-12 and XB-70. We went from wanting and developing Mach 3+ aircraft to wanting and developing subsonic multi-role aircraft. I think if Gary Powers hadn't been shot down, then yes we would have developed a superior (analogous) system. The shooting down of Gary Powers, in essence, killed the development of high-mach aircraft along with several other things (the Kennedy administration, Robert MacNamara, Vietnam War).


As far as technical challenges: they would have been overcome. In the 50s/60s the greatest challenge was not science or technology but politics.

 

[Byeman]

: Go read a few books on the development of the Blackbird.

I actually have, thank you very much. But thank you for your consideration ;D

Obviously, not very well.

 

[Kryptid]

I'm of the opinion that the Tsybin RSR much more closely resembles the Lockheed CL-400 Suntan than the A-12.

 

[flateric]

Tsybin could not know a dime of Suntan as first drawings of RS appeared back in 1954

 

[Kryptid]

Hmm, well I suppose that was just a case of convergent designs resulting from convergent requirements, then.

 

[surfinblackbird]

There was the Tsybin series of aircraf that were very functionally similar. (e.g. RSR etc)

Wiki on RSR

it was proposed to carry out barrel rolls to avoid Surface-to-air missiles,

I hope the man who proposed that was given the Order of Lenin

 

[flateric]

he was