Air-to-Air dogfighter champ?

[warheadpilot]

Question to all of the F-15, F-16, and F-18 fighter pilots out there...which jet holds the advantage in dogfighting (assuming the pilots are relatively equal in experience)? Does one do better in a slower knife fight and the other in a higher speed fight? My theory is the Viper has the advantage in medium to high speeds and the Hornet has the advantage in slow speed because of its good high-alpha capabilities. I am thinking the Eagle does best at high altitudes, since it cannot compete in turning performance with the other two jets. Although the F-15 has a great thrust-to-weight ratio, which I am assuming pilots will use to their advantage. I left the F-22 out of this question since it probably has all three of the other jets clearly beat.

[West Coast]

But why not the Harrier?



Running, err walking swiftly for me coat and hat

[Milo Minderbinder]

You do mean the Sea Harrier, surely?

[galaxy flyer]

Well, forget the rest, the Eagle has over a hundred aerial victories with precisely ZERO losses. No other plane can beat that!

GF

[Lord Spandex Masher]

But in practice it has lost!

[galaxy flyer]

Practice makes perfect and its record is perfect.

GF

[brickhistory]

I left the F-22 out of this question since it probably has all three of the
other jets clearly beat.


If that was the case, you'd think the oxygen system would work.

And that there'd be more than a few of them.

It's all fun and games having the shiny Cadillac until the Wild Bunch rides in on their grubby but numerous Harleys and is drinking in your O'Club

(ok, All Ranks Club now. What could possibly go wrong there...)

[orca]

I would like to state categorically that I have lost to just about everyone in Sea Harrier, Harrier and F-18.

Hope that helps.;)

[TBM-Legend]

The F-15 has most real kills. End of story...

The rest is B/S

[jwcook]

In that case the Sopwith Camel trumps it easily.
Credited with an unprecedented 1,300 to 3,000 aircraft kills (sources vary) during The Great War (1914-1918).

the others are all B/S:)

[Pontius Navigator]

Does that include other fighters and air forces such as the IAF or the IDF?

[AGS Man]

The F15 has been hit on at least 2 occasions by a sidewinder, one causing the loss of the aircraft. Admittedly these were both blue on blue incidents!

[ORAC]

Not sure the question makes sense as asked.

All 3 have difference performance envelopes with areas where they are better or worse than the other. The aim in combat being to drag your opponent into fighting in a corner of the envelope where you have advantage.

Assuming equal pilots with a limited time window the result should be a draw.

Most times it's a stand-off; the pilot with best low level performance trying to persuade the higher to come down; those with better sustained turn rate trying to get into a turning fight, the other playing the vertical.

The other factors in the real world are the number of weapons you have and fuel state/distance from base. Get fired out before the other guy and you're on a hiding from nothing and egressing from a fight on a low fuel state without getting shot is one of the hardest things to do.

Bye and bye, I highly recommend "Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering" by Robert Shaw

[Lone Kestrel]

Keeping it simple, and I mean dogfighting equals visual combat. Having flown against all 3 types in an F-14B I would say The F-18. My tactics against the F-15 was to drag him low, I had better turn performance with the wings forward and the more powerful engines helped keep the energy up. F-16, drag him slow and get him to hit his alpha limiter - the F-14 had not such thing. The F-18 however always seemed to have the edge no matter where you fought and it tended to be who made the first mistake lost. It was however great fun.:)

[Bigpants]

How about any German fighter pilot who survived WW2 without being killed or captured with more than fifty kills?

Galland a good place to start.

The TWU at Brawdy used to have a quote from him on the front of their student handbook...

Your discussion above reminds me of Red Flag 94 where various fighter pilot types would let the package get whacked rather than risk getting shot down themselves...

[Lone Kestrel]

Bigpants, was that aimed at my post. I was just talking about 1v1. The tactics for Red Flag etc is totally different and not normally visual combat.

[lj101]

This channel had the Mustang at number one slot albeit 'of all time'.

Military Channel: Wars, Weapons, Games, Top Ten Lists (http://military.discovery.com/tv-shows/warplane/top-10-fighter-aircraft.htm)

[Courtney Mil]

In a 1v1 visual fight, the 16 and 15 should out-turn the 18. The 16 is pretty much half an F-15 and they are very closely matched. One area where the f-15 wins is in the slow fight where the F-16 flight control system starts to back off pitch input whereas the F-15 system gives you full stabilator authority.

At the back end of the F-15 RTU course our students used to go up against the F-16 Guard units and would generally either win or escape.

[Lone Kestrel]

Courtney, the problem was seeing the little b@st@rds:sad: Size does matter!

[ORAC]

gQAmvKMGUko

335GdTqtyLs

[Courtney Mil]

True, Mate. And they have no problem spotting the titanium tennis court.

[stilton]

What about the ultimate Tomcat ? the F14D


With those big GE engines and that amazing wing from what I understand nothing could touch it, sad that it's gone


:sad:

[SCAFITE]

Many talk about Spitfires, P51D, F4U and various Gerry types, but the king of WW2 was the F6F Hellcat. In just over two years’ service 1943 to 1945 it claimed over 5,000 EA for the loss of less than 300 of its own, a combat ratio of 19 to 1 which is not bad. The aircraft is often over looked by many of today’s history programmes, but it was built like a brick sh*t house, had an enormous range, armed to the teeth, and was docile to fly according to many reports. Its top end performance was 385 mph but it could use a lot of its power in the climb and could dog fight the Zero. It was the FA18 of its day, not the best combat aircraft in the world, but did its missions and proved it as an all-round combat aircraft.

[Justanopinion]

As Courtney said the F15 and F16 are the better dogfighters than F18 on paper due to better thrust to weight and turning performance (2 circle).

Having fought the F16, F15 many times in the Super Hornet, as well as the Typhoon and F22, F18 has come off better against the 16,15 and Typhoon in my experience (stand fast completely clean F16!) on most occasions, due to bringing the fight to where it suits the Hornet. Pulling 9 g is not everything.

F22 just was not cricket however and appeared to defeat the laws of physics and all that is natural!

[Just This Once...]

Interesting numbers in this F-18 HUD… fly it like you stole it comes to mind:

http://www.alert5.com/newsphotos/f18fgunf2202.jpg

…and just to make the debrief even more interesting:

http://www.alert5.com/newsphotos/f18fgunf22.jpg

[MSOCS]

Orca,

I would like to state categorically that I have lost to just about everyone in Sea Harrier, Harrier and F-18.

Believe that included me in another Harrier once - 'just a few degrees more.....ah, faded!'

;)

[orca]

I would also like to state categorically that Red Air wouldn't ordinarily coach Blue Air into refining the notch!

I have a vague recollection we both ended up having to eke out the petrol a little after that one!;)

Happy days.

[Green Flash]

Here's a scenario.

Two fighters, at FL100, flying straight and level towards each other and when passing abeam, it's game on.

With 100 rounds each. Non gun cabs can have a podded gun fitted.

No other weapons allowed. Chaff and flares are permitted.

Pure, visual, turning gunfight.

Lets start with F-15 v F-16. Who wins?

[ORAC]

With 100 rounds each. Non gun cabs can have a podded gun fitted.

No other weapons allowed. Chaff and flares are permitted.

Pardon me for asking. In a visual fight with guns only, what's the point of chaff and flare?

[BEagle]

Pure, visual, turning gunfight.

Lets start with F-15 v F-16. Who wins?

As your girlfriend will probably confirm one day, often it's the 'gunner', not the 'gun' which is the deciding factor.....:hmm:

Also old age and treachery will frequently triumph over youth and skill....;)

[Green Flash]

Comfort blanket mostly! :))

Chaff might fox radar laid gunnery but I expect most will be using the Mk2 eyeball and the fight jocks godlike skills ;)

OK, no pyros. 100 rounds and and a steely glare.

[AR1]

Mk 2 Eyeball? - I've been robbed. Mum, Dad wtf were you doing delivering me with MK1?

[Easy Street]

I thought the Mk2 eyeball was tongue-in-cheek for NVGs! Night dogfighting, now that would be a real danger sport!

[AR1]

I did have the early external Myopia upgrade rolled out on mine so perhaps they aren't Mk1's anymore.

[Mk 1]

F6F's loss ratio was inevitably assisted by the fact that by late 1943 most of the decent Japanese stickmen were dead or (rarely) captured, and the aircraft were obsolete or obsolescent. The few decent aircraft the Japanese were able to field were hamstrung by tactics, inexperience and a lack of Avgas.

I don't think it was a better fighter aircraft than the P51D for instance (or others).

[TBM-Legend]

Question to all of the F-15, F-16, and F-18 fighter pilots out there...which jet holds the advantage in dogfighting
jwcook

Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 253
In that case the Sopwith Camel trumps it easily.
Credited with an unprecedented 1,300 to 3,000 aircraft kills (sources vary) during The Great War (1914-1918).

the others are all B/S



I guess JWCOOK and his Camel stats forgot to read the question...:=

[ORAC]

Green Flash, to repeat a classic call I heard during ACT ( amongst many others ) in the days prior to Fox 4.

Ac1: "Fox 1"

Ac2: "Chaff and flare, chaff and flare, continue".

Ac1: "Fox 2"

Ac2: "Chaff and flare, chaff and flare, continue".

Ac1: "Fox 3, chaff and flare that you bast*rd".

[CoffmanStarter]

For it's time the Fokker Dr.I Dreidecker must be on the Dog Fight Champ List ?

http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1429/5165326238_2dace31d34_n.jpg

Might even be a few PPRuNers that have mixed it with the little Fokker :E

[jwcook]

I guess JWCOOK and his Camel stats forgot to read the question...

I did read it...

The F-15 has most real kills. End of story...

The rest is B/S

If kills is the only criteria then the Sopwith wins, you were the one who changed the originals posters criteria by stating everything else is BS.

I was asserting by my post re the Sopwith that it was obviously incorrect.

As others have pointed out there's more to it than just kills, who the opposition is and any disproportionate situational awareness would play a bigger part in squewing the win loss ratio's.

It would be interesting to hear what the result is when everything is equal.

Cheers

[BEagle]

Might even be a few PPRuNers that have mixed it with the little Fokker :E

A few years ago, I was flying south somewhere near Wellingborough with a student doing his PPL Skill Test navigation diversion. Glancing out of the window, I was somewhat surprised to see a DR 1 flying north.

Checking first that we weren't trapped in some sort of Final Countdown flashback, we both enjoyed the sight of the little red triplane blatting merrily along - it looked superb!

It was probably one of the handful of Fokker DR 1 replicas still flying in the UK.

[dead_pan]

F6F's loss ratio was inevitably assisted by the fact that by late 1943 most of the decent Japanese stickmen were dead or (rarely) captured, and the aircraft were obsolete or obsolescent. The few decent aircraft the Japanese were able to field were hamstrung by tactics, inexperience and a lack of Avgas.

Yup, any type would perform well in a turkey shoot.

The same could be said for the F15 kill ratio - have they ever come up against quality opponents backed up by their own AWACS etc?

Strange - no one has mentioned the F3 yet...

[Courtney Mil]

Dead Pan,

The question was about F15, 16 and 18 in a visual fight. I've never found AWACS terribly useful in that scenario.

F-3 wasn't (sorry, isn't) a fighter.

[exMudmover]

Easy Street

Night dogfighting, now that would be a real danger sport!

Er, yes.

Late 60s, Middle East Hunter FGA9 Sqn. Me leading pair bouncing 4-ship dusk strike in very dusky conditions. All ac lights out at low level. We meet the opposition head on (far too close for comfort!) and rack it round into a turning match.

Result: everyone loses visual straight away because it’s dark – somebody should have thought of that! Also fortunate, because if we’d carried on someone would have speared in for sure.

Happy Cold War days!

[lj101]

F-3 wasn't (sorry, isn't) a fighter.

Was it a lover?

[ORAC]

Was it a lover? It swung both ways......

[TBM-Legend]

B/S referred to the other two types not every other fighter built...

[CoffmanStarter]

A few years ago, I was flying south somewhere near Wellingborough with a student doing his PPL Skill Test navigation diversion. Glancing out of the window, I was somewhat surprised to see a DR 1 flying north.

Then I'll bet that was G-FOKK ... the Jasta Binks replica DR 1 out Sywell :ok:

http://www.jastabinksaviation.com/6077tvg.JPG

[Justanopinion]

that has little to do with real life capability in the Air-Air arena.
Wasn't that the same opinion prior to Vietnam; we have missiles now, BFM is dead? How did that go?

[SCAFITE]

Still had to knock them down and in huge numbers

[Just This Once...]

But didn't a MiG 29 get hosed by a lady flying a Su-27 in 1999?

[Backwards PLT]

I think you make my point with the Vietnam example. The kill:loss ratio didn't suddenly improve because the US introduced a 9G wonder jet, it improved because they started to (re)train their aircrew proper BFM and improved on the weapons.

I'm not saying turn performance isn't useful, it is, but it isn't everything - it's not even top 3 important imho.

EDIT: But it does look good and it is fun!

[Courtney Mil]

Backwards PLT,

I agree completely with most of what you say, but would just add this. Turn performance isn't just for a turning fight. The use of high energy manoeuvre at range costs incoming missiles a huge amount of energy and is, therefore, an important feature for air superiority/dominance fighters. Its benefit at closer range is obvious.

I understand your reticence in joining the debate, given the narrow scope of the question (which is still a valid one for interest). Perhaps it's time for another, all encompassing air-to-air tactics and hardware debate. :E

[Backwards PLT]

Courtney

Agreed. 5G at 40k and M1.2 is more important than 9G at SL and 400kts. Discuss!

But that would be thread hijack............

[Justanopinion]

PLT I suppose I was confused as to your point then.

The original question was which jet holds the advantage in dogfighting

You said that this (dogfighting) had little to do with "real life capability in the Air to Air arena" and then countered that improved BFM skills improved the kill: loss ratio in Vietnam.

I am more than in agreement that 9g capability is not everything as per my earlier post.

[Easy Street]

justanopinion,

I think the point is that
which jet holds the advantage in dogfighting
is, on its own, not a particularly relevant question to real-world capability, because the questions:


Which jet?
Which weapons?
Which role? (mud, swing, pure A-A)
Which tactics?
How much experience?

(amongst others) all need to be considered together if a meaningful answer is to be obtained.

[cuefaye]

5G at 40k and M1.2 is more important than 9G at SL and 400kts.
Discuss!


Useful, but it all depends - on many, many things. Kinetic anywhere is the key.

[ORAC]

We getting back to Boyd, energy and OODA Loop? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Boyd_(military_strategist))

[NITRO104]

"I'm not saying turn performance isn't useful, it is, but it isn't everything - it's not even top 3 important imho."I'd say the energy (and turning performance as its indicator) is crucial, for any kind of air-air activity, particularly in a small FIR.
Airliners can do the rest just fine (large radar, long legs, large load, etc.).
My 2c, anyway.

[US Herk]

When I went through UPT in the early '90s immediately post GWI, our flight commander was an F15C guy from the 33rd Nomads - they of 'combat kill' legend. ;)

On one of the many weather days at Columbus, one of the young studs asked what it was like to dogfight the other blue air. The reply was something along the lines of, "Take them vertical until they run out of energy, then roll in and kill them."

He said some of the very early F16A models had some built in software that was smarter than the pilot and would "recover" by rolling to the nearest horizon once it got too slow.

He said the F14 would swing its wings out once it got low on energy.

He said the F18 was the hardest to tell, so you just took them up until they couldn't stand it anymore.


He also told me their bold face/CAP was pretty simple, "Throttle good engine - as required". :E

[Mk 1]

Minor thread hijack:

The overwhelming opinion was that the BVR missiles were junk - proved by the US experience in Vietnam. I was of the understanding that there was ROE that meant the bad guys had to be visually ID'd before letting fly - and when your opposition was as small and fast as a Mig 21, that meant letting them get inside the minimum engagement envelope of the Sparrows.

How much of the poor missile success was because of the restrictive ROE? Was there even a restrictive ROE? Or was it more to do with the early missiles developmental immaturity?

Thanks.

[Busta]

I'm with Beags.

On TLP I saw 3 sec guns tracking film on an F18 canopy by A GAF 104, could've sold tickets!

Nothing matters very much, most things don't matter at all.

[Courtney Mil]

How much of the poor missile success was because of the restrictive ROE?

Lots

Was there even a restrictive ROE?

Very

Or was it more to do with the early missiles developmental immaturity?

Yes, that too.

Once in close, the MiGs were lower wing-loaders than, say, the F4 and new skills were needed to take them on. That's how we ended up with the aggressor sqns.

[Courtney Mil]

In my F-15 days, the FCS simply backed-off the F-16's stick input as it got slower so that you couldn't over-alpha it. That was a good regime of flight to get them in because they stopped turning whereas we didn't.

[ORAC]

Not sure about that, but I do recall this. I remember being told, though unsure if it's true, that the override was only added as a result of an aircraft loss.

Wiki: F-16 - Negative stability and fly-by-wire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-16_Fighting_Falcon#Negative_stability_and_fly-by-wire)

.........Although each axis of movement is limited by the FLCC, flight testing revealed that "assaulting" multiple limiters at high AOA and low speed can result in an AOA far exceeding the 25° limit; colloquially referred to as "departing". This causes a deep stall; a near-freefall at 50° to 60° AOA, either upright or inverted. While at a very high AOA, the aircraft's attitude is stable but control surfaces are ineffective and the aircraft's pitch limiter locks the stabilators at an extreme pitch-up or pitch-down attempting to recover; the pitch-limiting can be overridden so the pilot can "rock" the nose via pitch control to recover............

[Courtney Mil]

I reckon that sounds about right, ORAC. Doesn't sound much fun, does it?

[US Herk]

I love all these FBW systems that think they're smarter than pilots! ;)

The Airbus A320 crash comes spectacuarly to mind.

The CV-22 'logic' that will allow you to crash before allowing you to overtorque the engines comes to mind.

I believe first generation C-130J software wouldn't let you re-start the aircraft after shutdown if ANY limit had been exceeded until data was downloaded to maintenance computer (not useful for an aircraft that does occasionally land places you don't want to stay).

And others I can't think of just now...

Humans make mistakes. Computers only prevent mistakes their human programmers thought of.

[Bevo]

A couple of thoughts from my little experience. The F-15 has on-board systems that allow it to ID the target at beyond visual ranges for ROE purposes.

Most fighter pilots have had very little time actually firing the gun on their aircraft in an air-to-air employment. The HUD display may or not may not truly represent the bullet path. Hitting a high-performance fighter with a gun is more difficult than most believe.

The new newest IR missiles such as the Russian R73M are highly maneuverable, can be launched very far off boresight, and are resistant to decoys.

Make sure your fighter has a helmet-mounted site/display for that visual fight to take advantage of your IR missile.