F4 vs Lightning vs F15 vs F14 vs F16 etc
On the question of SHAR v Mirage in the Falklands, the ARG aircraft had little or no combat fuel. They went a long way to deliver their weapons. Their only option was to run in, deliver, keep their heads down and run. If they got involved on any kind of fight, they would never have made it home.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Holly Beach, Louisiana
Posts: 916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was the F-14 was canned in the end because it was requiring too much maint per flying hour? I suppose if your doing carrier ops you don't want the second wave to go u/s on the flight deck and block the first wave from landing.
Perhaps you might consult with someone who understands Carrier Flight Ops.
That is not going to happen for any number of reasons. The aircraft might go U/S but they will not block the landing area of the Carrier.
Even if they were for some reason....they would go over the side in order to clear the Deck.
Even if they were for some reason....they would go over the side in order to clear the Deck.
Fox3, old fella. Yeah, well. SA is God, without a doubt, no matter what you fly. And that doesn't mean having all the information in the world, it means having what you need. If we're comparing F-15 with F-3, we need to put aside the obvious differences. Well, not all of them.
I would say this, the F-15 with the kit it carries, radar, data link and defensive aids, along with energy manoeuvrability, is very well placed even in complex environments. But the workload could be an issue. The F-3, in its later days, was blessed with great kit and similarly excellent long range SA.
Now, the question is this. Are we talking post-merge? I think that's the intent of the OP. If we are, the idea is obviously not to have to go there; it's a dangerous place. Hence Phoenix, AMRAAM, etc. but once you get there, airframe performance and ease of targeting become the big factor (including high off boresite aiming). Then, I'd rather be in an F-15 than anything else. No doubt (just taking the types mentioned here).
****ty night over the North Sea trying to work with the Navy with ECM, give me the F-3 and a good Nav.
Is that an answer? Probably not. But it all comes Down to the fact that there are so many scenarios.
Dare I say, "horses for courses."
I would say this, the F-15 with the kit it carries, radar, data link and defensive aids, along with energy manoeuvrability, is very well placed even in complex environments. But the workload could be an issue. The F-3, in its later days, was blessed with great kit and similarly excellent long range SA.
Now, the question is this. Are we talking post-merge? I think that's the intent of the OP. If we are, the idea is obviously not to have to go there; it's a dangerous place. Hence Phoenix, AMRAAM, etc. but once you get there, airframe performance and ease of targeting become the big factor (including high off boresite aiming). Then, I'd rather be in an F-15 than anything else. No doubt (just taking the types mentioned here).
****ty night over the North Sea trying to work with the Navy with ECM, give me the F-3 and a good Nav.
Is that an answer? Probably not. But it all comes Down to the fact that there are so many scenarios.
Dare I say, "horses for courses."
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Canada
Age: 69
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember speaking to a Luftwaffe Phantom pilot at an airshow, and he mentioned ACM vs an F-15. He said that in his experience, two Phantoms could do well against a single F-15 if they were able to overload the Eagle pilot, everything else being equal.
Post-merge, the F3 ought to be dead against anything US-made - the only thing I ever beat consistently was the Mirage F1. 180-by-zip (Fox1 boresight shot for kicks - worked thrice!), unload and maxi-chat was the only merge manoeuvre I ever used against an F-series that had seen me, and the only one I saw anyone else try.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: East Sussex
Age: 86
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LSM
Don't know about a Hunter in a Harvard's gunsight but I once got bounced by a Jaguar when in a Boscombe Harvard at lowish level. Spoke to him later. He was never able to get a solution on me and had to break off due to running out of motion lotion. I found it handy to be able to hide behind the odd hill fort and tumulus whilst he rushed around looking for me. I doubt if a missile would have got me either as I doubt if the Harvard puts out enough IR.
Don't know about a Hunter in a Harvard's gunsight but I once got bounced by a Jaguar when in a Boscombe Harvard at lowish level. Spoke to him later. He was never able to get a solution on me and had to break off due to running out of motion lotion. I found it handy to be able to hide behind the odd hill fort and tumulus whilst he rushed around looking for me. I doubt if a missile would have got me either as I doubt if the Harvard puts out enough IR.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 76
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jag v. Hawk...
Had a wonderful pax ride in a Hawk some years ago.. bounced a pair of Jaguars (all auth'd) and ended up Foxed by the lead Jag! Mind you pax rules limited us to 4g, but the WAFU up front went apoplectic....
Had a wonderful pax ride in a Hawk some years ago.. bounced a pair of Jaguars (all auth'd) and ended up Foxed by the lead Jag! Mind you pax rules limited us to 4g, but the WAFU up front went apoplectic....
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Did I Tell You I Was A Harrier Pilot
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Most times the opposition will be cuffed to fly red-air tactics and weapons... Blue v blue is not realistic and not that frequently done - in my experience, at least - there's not much to be gained fighting BVR or WVR against your own side's weapons....
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My opinion is based on having logged 1897 hrs. in the Phantom (178 combat missions in SEA from Korat Thailand and a tour at RAF Lakenheath), a flight in the Lightning at Coltishall in 1973, 525 hrs F-15A/C , 260 hrs. in the F-14A, and 223 hrs. in the F/A-18A (Navy exchange tour with VX-4).
Now one flight in an aircraft is not nearly enough to really know how an aircraft will do in an engagement but I will say that the flight controls in the Lightning were much more harmonized than those in the Phantom. And although I never had a chance to go 1 V 1 with a Lightning in a Phantom, I believe I would have tried to keep the Lightning from getting a shot and try to run him out of fuel. One of the problems is that we very seldom flew the Phantom without wing tanks, which did not give a good understanding of its true capabilities (and fuel limitations). In combat we did not hesitate to jettison those tanks when any MiGs were around.
First to the OP; realize that the focus of modern fighter tactics is to try to kill your enemy before you get to the merge. In that case the on-board systems are the key. This includes the ability to identify the target at beyond visual ranges. The F-15C has at least two systems that allow BVR ID. This is especially important in a situation where you do not know how many enemy aircraft are against you. That is also why you can’t get a true picture of an aircraft’s abilities (or your own) when you are doing 1V1 or 2V2 training missions. In those instances you know that when you have the one or two aircraft accounted for you don’t have to worry about some other bogy ruining your day. Hence, when the training mission is a Red Flag, and the number of aircraft is not known, you learn very quickly not to get into a very long turning fight.
Going to the F-14 from the F-15 was a step down in my opinion. The thrust to weight of the F-14 was about the same as the Phantom, and although the swing wing allowed better low speed handling in the F-14, it also allowed you to have a pretty good idea of the F-14 energy state. Also, although the Phoenix missile was a long range weapon, it weighed 1,000 lbs. and was not very maneuverable. So against a fighter target you had to hope the target was not aware of the launch and did not acquire the missile as it was fairly easy to out maneuver it. I never had a chance to fly the F-14D with the GE F110-400 engines which I understand was a much better aircraft than the F-14A.
So to cut to the chase, I agree with Courtney, of the aircraft listed I would pick the F-15 to go to war. By the way my next pick would be the F/A-18. Unfortunately the best F-15 out there is probably the Singapore F-15SA with F110-GE-129C engines, the AN/APG-63v3 AESA radar, an Infra-Red Search and Track, and the JHMCS helmet-mounted display.
Also, while I was at VX-4 we had two RN exchange officers there; Dave “Brave” Braithwaite and Clive “Spag” Morrell. It would be interesting to get there view of the Harrier vs. the F-14.
Now one flight in an aircraft is not nearly enough to really know how an aircraft will do in an engagement but I will say that the flight controls in the Lightning were much more harmonized than those in the Phantom. And although I never had a chance to go 1 V 1 with a Lightning in a Phantom, I believe I would have tried to keep the Lightning from getting a shot and try to run him out of fuel. One of the problems is that we very seldom flew the Phantom without wing tanks, which did not give a good understanding of its true capabilities (and fuel limitations). In combat we did not hesitate to jettison those tanks when any MiGs were around.
First to the OP; realize that the focus of modern fighter tactics is to try to kill your enemy before you get to the merge. In that case the on-board systems are the key. This includes the ability to identify the target at beyond visual ranges. The F-15C has at least two systems that allow BVR ID. This is especially important in a situation where you do not know how many enemy aircraft are against you. That is also why you can’t get a true picture of an aircraft’s abilities (or your own) when you are doing 1V1 or 2V2 training missions. In those instances you know that when you have the one or two aircraft accounted for you don’t have to worry about some other bogy ruining your day. Hence, when the training mission is a Red Flag, and the number of aircraft is not known, you learn very quickly not to get into a very long turning fight.
Going to the F-14 from the F-15 was a step down in my opinion. The thrust to weight of the F-14 was about the same as the Phantom, and although the swing wing allowed better low speed handling in the F-14, it also allowed you to have a pretty good idea of the F-14 energy state. Also, although the Phoenix missile was a long range weapon, it weighed 1,000 lbs. and was not very maneuverable. So against a fighter target you had to hope the target was not aware of the launch and did not acquire the missile as it was fairly easy to out maneuver it. I never had a chance to fly the F-14D with the GE F110-400 engines which I understand was a much better aircraft than the F-14A.
So to cut to the chase, I agree with Courtney, of the aircraft listed I would pick the F-15 to go to war. By the way my next pick would be the F/A-18. Unfortunately the best F-15 out there is probably the Singapore F-15SA with F110-GE-129C engines, the AN/APG-63v3 AESA radar, an Infra-Red Search and Track, and the JHMCS helmet-mounted display.
Also, while I was at VX-4 we had two RN exchange officers there; Dave “Brave” Braithwaite and Clive “Spag” Morrell. It would be interesting to get there view of the Harrier vs. the F-14.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: UK
Age: 30
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Courtney - I read your website the other day. Very interesting read re: your F-15 days.
It's an awesome aircraft and I hope the USAF keep it in service for longer than is currently planned. The F-22 might look nice and do cool things in the air, but some of us prefer some of the older jets.
It's an awesome aircraft and I hope the USAF keep it in service for longer than is currently planned. The F-22 might look nice and do cool things in the air, but some of us prefer some of the older jets.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bevo,
What has just occurred is a classic pprune-ism. Courtney has offered some sage advice, you have swung in with the absolute experts opinion based on experience and fact...and then some bloke came along and reduced us once again to 'well my favourite is...'!
As it happens I also think we keep missing the F-18E off the list, but I will declare a bias having flown them. However, if you do have AESA, 9X, JHMCS, and a jet that's happiest at 35 alpha (but with no limit) you have a potent machine.
I am clearly not one of the 'greats' you name Bevo but I did collect 1500 Sea Harrier and Harrier hours. A simple comparator to the F-18E is that the Sea Harrier had the better radar (for BFM, the combat modes were excellent) the Harrier had the better roll, the Super Hornet/ Rhino had the better everything else.
Typhoon mate - when you have F-22 on your side it's like knowing the world police are waiting in the wings for you. They're incredible. Mind you when they're on the other side they still struggle if you can do off bore sight and match them for alpha.
What has just occurred is a classic pprune-ism. Courtney has offered some sage advice, you have swung in with the absolute experts opinion based on experience and fact...and then some bloke came along and reduced us once again to 'well my favourite is...'!
As it happens I also think we keep missing the F-18E off the list, but I will declare a bias having flown them. However, if you do have AESA, 9X, JHMCS, and a jet that's happiest at 35 alpha (but with no limit) you have a potent machine.
I am clearly not one of the 'greats' you name Bevo but I did collect 1500 Sea Harrier and Harrier hours. A simple comparator to the F-18E is that the Sea Harrier had the better radar (for BFM, the combat modes were excellent) the Harrier had the better roll, the Super Hornet/ Rhino had the better everything else.
Typhoon mate - when you have F-22 on your side it's like knowing the world police are waiting in the wings for you. They're incredible. Mind you when they're on the other side they still struggle if you can do off bore sight and match them for alpha.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: england
Age: 61
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my favourite has to be c130 v f15 at red flag in the 80s.
the herc was red air supply and taking part as a an12 cub.
hot to trot eagle driver slides in for a nice gun kill and the ramp of the herc is down..loadies point a strobe gun at him, bang bang etc.
after the exercise the eagle jock is reminded a an12 has a big gun out back!!
FISH.
the herc was red air supply and taking part as a an12 cub.
hot to trot eagle driver slides in for a nice gun kill and the ramp of the herc is down..loadies point a strobe gun at him, bang bang etc.
after the exercise the eagle jock is reminded a an12 has a big gun out back!!
FISH.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bevo,
Just to clarify, the Sea Harrier radar was better solely for BFM. It's advantage over the AESA was the search volumes and mechanisation, plus it had a better 'switchology to actual lock ratio'. The AESA was a world apart for everything else, in fact it wasn't really a radar - more like flying around with the 'Eye of Sauron' by your feet!
Just to clarify, the Sea Harrier radar was better solely for BFM. It's advantage over the AESA was the search volumes and mechanisation, plus it had a better 'switchology to actual lock ratio'. The AESA was a world apart for everything else, in fact it wasn't really a radar - more like flying around with the 'Eye of Sauron' by your feet!
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: germany
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" Is that an answer? Probably not. But it all comes Down to the fact that there are so many scenarios. "
just some spice
Steve Davies - Red Eagles: America's Secret MIGs
page 289. >
" The MiG-21's slow speed capability was incredible, but not as good as that of the F/A-18...."
" Phelan explained what "treeing" someone meant:
You treed someone by getting them to run out of airspeed so that they could no longer pull a loop. If they tried to, you knew they would fall off to either side, or they would bob their noses up and down. The Soviets had a terrific airplane in the MiG-21. Hands down, I could kill anyone other than an F-16 or an F/A-18 in that airplane. The F-16 could fly over the top of me and get in behind and the F/A-18 had even better low-speed handling. As for the others, I would do the tree. Taking the F-14 as an example, I would try and get them to go vertical a couple of times and then park right behind them. "
page 295. >
" I had just treed this F-15 and am pulling up right behind this guy with less than 100 knots of airspeed. All of a sudden, this huge F-15 just starts falling back down towards me, out of control. He had completely run out of airspeed. "
" back on the ground the Eagle pilot told to Phelan: I got lost in myself. For a minute I thought I was fighting a real MiG."
" Even the mighty F-15 Eagle had no solution in dogfight below 150-250 knots against
MiG-21 in US Aggressor hands. At the beginning of dogfight, at the speed of 400-500
knots MiG-21 will turn at max g loosing 70 knots per second, ending at the speed of 70
knots in less than 90º of turn (deceleration of 3.5 g, more intensive than Harrier’s VIFF
turn). Reportedly, no other aircraft can do that. This way MiG will remain behind every
opponent still having sufficient controllability for gun tracking using rudder rolls.
Opponents would think that at this speed MiG-21 can only bring down the nose and dive, but
the MiG at less than 100 knots has sufficient pitch authority to raise the nose at enemy. If
F-15 tries to follow, ’21 should execute 'barrel-roll ' to remain behind the Eagle.
It is obvious that MiG-21 'Aggressor' pilots pulled full aft stick in turn regardless of the
lateral oscillations, roll-off and temporary loss of control. "
just some spice
Steve Davies - Red Eagles: America's Secret MIGs
page 289. >
" The MiG-21's slow speed capability was incredible, but not as good as that of the F/A-18...."
" Phelan explained what "treeing" someone meant:
You treed someone by getting them to run out of airspeed so that they could no longer pull a loop. If they tried to, you knew they would fall off to either side, or they would bob their noses up and down. The Soviets had a terrific airplane in the MiG-21. Hands down, I could kill anyone other than an F-16 or an F/A-18 in that airplane. The F-16 could fly over the top of me and get in behind and the F/A-18 had even better low-speed handling. As for the others, I would do the tree. Taking the F-14 as an example, I would try and get them to go vertical a couple of times and then park right behind them. "
page 295. >
" I had just treed this F-15 and am pulling up right behind this guy with less than 100 knots of airspeed. All of a sudden, this huge F-15 just starts falling back down towards me, out of control. He had completely run out of airspeed. "
" back on the ground the Eagle pilot told to Phelan: I got lost in myself. For a minute I thought I was fighting a real MiG."
" Even the mighty F-15 Eagle had no solution in dogfight below 150-250 knots against
MiG-21 in US Aggressor hands. At the beginning of dogfight, at the speed of 400-500
knots MiG-21 will turn at max g loosing 70 knots per second, ending at the speed of 70
knots in less than 90º of turn (deceleration of 3.5 g, more intensive than Harrier’s VIFF
turn). Reportedly, no other aircraft can do that. This way MiG will remain behind every
opponent still having sufficient controllability for gun tracking using rudder rolls.
Opponents would think that at this speed MiG-21 can only bring down the nose and dive, but
the MiG at less than 100 knots has sufficient pitch authority to raise the nose at enemy. If
F-15 tries to follow, ’21 should execute 'barrel-roll ' to remain behind the Eagle.
It is obvious that MiG-21 'Aggressor' pilots pulled full aft stick in turn regardless of the
lateral oscillations, roll-off and temporary loss of control. "
Last edited by MiG21SM; 9th Sep 2014 at 20:46.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Great Midwest
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fighter pilots never, ever want to allow themselves to get low and slow...that is a death sentence. As one gains experience one learns to stay fast and use the vertical.
I’m going to have to take issue with your statement that “the MiG at less than 100 knots has sufficient pitch authority to raise the nose at enemy”. Sorry but that is a vast overstatement. While I don’t disagree that you don’t want to be slow in a fighter I would also like to note that the MiG-21 had a very high induced drag with its delta wing and so it slowed down in a hard turning fight. The MiG was then slow to accelerate out of that condition. In an F-4 you could in fact turn with a MiG-21 below 250 kts by using approach flaps (1/2 flaps). In that condition you could actually turn in front of the MiG-21 if you were above him since he could not bring his nose up to track you. I have been there several times. This was not on the approved list of F-4 maneuvers but was effective. And here I am talking about the MiG-21Fishbed C/E and the really nice and light F-7M. By the way if you want a real slow speed problem, try to gun an A-10!
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: germany
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
> Bevo
Those are not my statements:
" ... " = All are quotes from US 'agresor' pilots, who flew the MiG-21
What were the RoE with the Red Eagles MiGs? You must to slow down, to give some chance to the MiGs?
F-14 - it means we are deep in the Top-Gun era, with the World's best trained dogfighters in the cockpits of the Tomcats.
F-15 - in the cockpit the 'air superiority guys ' of the USAF...
All of them engaged in a low speed fight, and all of them failed.
I know this is a book only, but I believe Phelan...
I’m going to have to take issue with your statement
" ... " = All are quotes from US 'agresor' pilots, who flew the MiG-21
Fighter pilots never, ever want to allow themselves to get low and slow...
Taking the F-14 as an example, I would try and get them to go vertical a couple of times and then park right behind them. "
" I had just treed this F-15 and am pulling up right behind this guy with less than 100 knots of airspeed. All of a sudden, this huge F-15 just starts falling back down towards me, out of control. He had completely run out of airspeed. "
" back on the ground the Eagle pilot told to Phelan: I got lost in myself. For a minute I thought I was fighting a real MiG."
" back on the ground the Eagle pilot told to Phelan: I got lost in myself. For a minute I thought I was fighting a real MiG."
All of them engaged in a low speed fight, and all of them failed.
I know this is a book only, but I believe Phelan...
Last edited by MiG21SM; 10th Sep 2014 at 15:03.