Fastest real fighter
Thread Starter
Fastest real fighter
After extensive discussion with multiple FJ types, (and with a lot of hours, but no FJ Cred at all personally)
i’m given to understand that the F4 was the fastest and most capable platform ever in the usaf/nato inventory. Interested in opinions with legitimate information.
Asking for a high-time aviation organization....
i’m given to understand that the F4 was the fastest and most capable platform ever in the usaf/nato inventory. Interested in opinions with legitimate information.
Asking for a high-time aviation organization....
Thread Starter
I can land a 402 full of cancelled checks with 1550# of ice, but Ivan in a MiG Trainer or even an upset YAK is gonna ruin my day at this point. I’m just looking for actual guidance.
After extensive discussion with multiple FJ types, (and with a lot of hours, but no FJ Cred at all personally)
i’m given to understand that the F4 was the fastest and most capable platform ever in the usaf/nato inventory. Interested in opinions with legitimate information.
Asking for a high-time aviation organization....
i’m given to understand that the F4 was the fastest and most capable platform ever in the usaf/nato inventory. Interested in opinions with legitimate information.
Asking for a high-time aviation organization....
https://discovery.nationalarchives.g..._d=ADM&_d=DSIR
Unfortunately thanks to Covid, they are shut at the minute.
USAF pilot notes below.
https://www.usaf-sig.org/index.php/r...-4e-01-10-1970
421 Dog
Are you asking if the F4 was the best aircraft of it’s era or if it is the best aircraft to have ever served?
If it is the latter then ask yourself this. Why was it taken out of service with the USAF several decades ago?
Take any metric you like and you will likely find that the F4 does not beat any of the modern USAF inventory. Maybe it can sneak the F16 on payload or range (I haven’t checked) but the F16 will destroy it in BFM (there’s a great picture of an F16 vs F4 in a rate fight with smoke trails to illustrate the point).
BV
If it is the latter then ask yourself this. Why was it taken out of service with the USAF several decades ago?
Take any metric you like and you will likely find that the F4 does not beat any of the modern USAF inventory. Maybe it can sneak the F16 on payload or range (I haven’t checked) but the F16 will destroy it in BFM (there’s a great picture of an F16 vs F4 in a rate fight with smoke trails to illustrate the point).
BV
Salute!
Actchally my dear Royalists, I think you will find the colonist's F-106 was likely fastest fighter, and I do not count the YF-12 vehicles, as nothing has come close to them since 1967 b. ut they couldn't "fight".
The Six could turn with the best of them and if chasing down a Bison could get to M2.5 The Zipper, aka 104, was about the same and we have war stories of them cruising at 70K from here to Homestead. Personal contacts upon request.
The Zipper was a rocket, but couldn't turn well once slow. The Six could turn like anything in the air, but lost energy a bit more than you want. It was still the best Air Defense Command close fighter that existed in my days back then ( 66 to 70's). The Duece could also do the "bat turn", but didn't have the big motor like the Six to regain energy. Trust me, nose-pointing capability is great. You just have to trade off with the energy game.
For flat out speed nowadays I would take the F-22 at 60K.
Gums opines....
Actchally my dear Royalists, I think you will find the colonist's F-106 was likely fastest fighter, and I do not count the YF-12 vehicles, as nothing has come close to them since 1967 b. ut they couldn't "fight".
The Six could turn with the best of them and if chasing down a Bison could get to M2.5 The Zipper, aka 104, was about the same and we have war stories of them cruising at 70K from here to Homestead. Personal contacts upon request.
The Zipper was a rocket, but couldn't turn well once slow. The Six could turn like anything in the air, but lost energy a bit more than you want. It was still the best Air Defense Command close fighter that existed in my days back then ( 66 to 70's). The Duece could also do the "bat turn", but didn't have the big motor like the Six to regain energy. Trust me, nose-pointing capability is great. You just have to trade off with the energy game.
For flat out speed nowadays I would take the F-22 at 60K.
Gums opines....
Thread Starter
Truthfully the issue came up as a squid question, and I was tasked with providing some actual data. From some literature provided by an associate, the F-4 was promulgated as having a higher sustainable Mach speed than any comparable craft with a similar air to air, or air to mud weapon capacity.
Again, I’m on the outside looking in, and a bunch of these guys flew under Jesus nuts.
I really appreciate the perspective being provided. Thank you all.
Again, I’m on the outside looking in, and a bunch of these guys flew under Jesus nuts.
I really appreciate the perspective being provided. Thank you all.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
the F-4 was promulgated as having a higher sustainable Mach speed than any comparable craft with a similar air to air, or air to mud weapon capacity.
In Vietnam the Thud had the reputation as the rocket ship whilst carrying a payload. The F-4 isn’t that fast once you hang a couple of tanks, pylons and weapons on it. In UK AD, in usual configuration, I doubt I ever saw one go much over 600kts.
At low level I’ve controlled F-3s chasing down F-111s and B-1s well in excess of 700kts - to the shock of the bomber crews as they rocketed past...
At altitude I’ve seen a Lightning chase down a Mirage-IV which was doing M2+. But the Lightning could only hack it for a few minutes for the intercept, whilst the Mirage was cruising. And I doubt they had the throttle to the firewall.
A friend used to tell of coming off a target in NVN, now clean in a F-4D, doing about 720 KIAS, engine HI TEMP lights on, and a Thud joins up with the speed brakes out.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the Fence
Age: 71
Posts: 373
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes
on
4 Posts
The Tornado F3 could make 800kts IAS at low level prior to limitations being introduced! Possibly the fastest, however not a "real fighter".
BV, For your interest the F4 could compete for many years against many newer fighters.
In the early F4 days I saw 790kts in a F4M at low level. 750kts was the limit with wing tanks but luckily they stayed on. A typical JP error when being over enthusiastic!
In later years in RAF service the engines were detuned and thrust decreased by up to 15%!!
At Seymour Johnson in 1984 they had the Block 48 upgraded F4s to ARN-101 standards, the ASN-63 inertial navigation system, the ASQ-91 weapons release computer, and the ASN-46A analog navigation computer set were deleted. The ASG-26 lead computing optical gunsight was improved and made easier to use, with weapons control switches and displays made easier to read. Basically as a "bomb truck" a 2 seat F16 with far better range and load capability.
BV, For your interest the F4 could compete for many years against many newer fighters.
In the early F4 days I saw 790kts in a F4M at low level. 750kts was the limit with wing tanks but luckily they stayed on. A typical JP error when being over enthusiastic!
In later years in RAF service the engines were detuned and thrust decreased by up to 15%!!
At Seymour Johnson in 1984 they had the Block 48 upgraded F4s to ARN-101 standards, the ASN-63 inertial navigation system, the ASQ-91 weapons release computer, and the ASN-46A analog navigation computer set were deleted. The ASG-26 lead computing optical gunsight was improved and made easier to use, with weapons control switches and displays made easier to read. Basically as a "bomb truck" a 2 seat F16 with far better range and load capability.
GF,
The F-105 speedbrakes were two of the AB nozzle petals and you had to be out of AB to use 'em. So if you did run down an F-4D at 720k, when you put out the 'boards' you could be sure you weren't going to stay with him very much longer. OTOH....
....In the waning days of the F-105, just for old times grins, we TIK guys in our F-4Ds did a couple of weekend days of rat-racing with the FWH F-105s at low altitude on the Hill ranges. I could pass an F-105 head on, make the turn and run him down in the Phantom. However to be fair, we were clean and they had a CL fuel tank and were the hump-back LORAN birds.
F-4 max Q was 750, F-105 was 800, and I think F-111 was even higher. Have seen 750 in an F-4, never saw 800 in an F-105, best I recall was around 650. However, they were old and tired then. If you count the MiG-23 as a USAF aircraft
, evidently they were pretty quick.
The F-105 speedbrakes were two of the AB nozzle petals and you had to be out of AB to use 'em. So if you did run down an F-4D at 720k, when you put out the 'boards' you could be sure you weren't going to stay with him very much longer. OTOH....
....In the waning days of the F-105, just for old times grins, we TIK guys in our F-4Ds did a couple of weekend days of rat-racing with the FWH F-105s at low altitude on the Hill ranges. I could pass an F-105 head on, make the turn and run him down in the Phantom. However to be fair, we were clean and they had a CL fuel tank and were the hump-back LORAN birds.
F-4 max Q was 750, F-105 was 800, and I think F-111 was even higher. Have seen 750 in an F-4, never saw 800 in an F-105, best I recall was around 650. However, they were old and tired then. If you count the MiG-23 as a USAF aircraft
, evidently they were pretty quick.
In terms of pure straight line speed, I think the high water mark is still the 104
Salute!
Good times, back then, Okie!
Our Thud buddies at Hill musta had the faster birds, as we had one guy try to run one down and he gave up after getting to 740 KIAS and that big beast was still moving out. We always liked their quotes in a mission briefing - "we like to go in at 600 knots and then come out fast!"
I always thot my trusty VooDoo was 800 KIAS placard, but docs show 700 KIAS. All I know is the thing accelerated better than the Viper going thru the mach. AB climb schedule was .85M or so until 20K, then bunt over and get to 1.3M and on up to 50,000 feet. We would never get to level before getting supersonic and then to 1.3M, and then up we went with the rate of climb meter pegged. 2 minutes from a standing start. My God, I was just a 23 yr old nugget. Our rule of thumb was mil power takeoff once the calculated burner roll was under 2,000 feet!!!! Grand Forks got really cold, so our density altitude was quite low, and they picked that place for the Streak Eagle climb records years later.
Gums recalls.....
Good times, back then, Okie!
Our Thud buddies at Hill musta had the faster birds, as we had one guy try to run one down and he gave up after getting to 740 KIAS and that big beast was still moving out. We always liked their quotes in a mission briefing - "we like to go in at 600 knots and then come out fast!"
I always thot my trusty VooDoo was 800 KIAS placard, but docs show 700 KIAS. All I know is the thing accelerated better than the Viper going thru the mach. AB climb schedule was .85M or so until 20K, then bunt over and get to 1.3M and on up to 50,000 feet. We would never get to level before getting supersonic and then to 1.3M, and then up we went with the rate of climb meter pegged. 2 minutes from a standing start. My God, I was just a 23 yr old nugget. Our rule of thumb was mil power takeoff once the calculated burner roll was under 2,000 feet!!!! Grand Forks got really cold, so our density altitude was quite low, and they picked that place for the Streak Eagle climb records years later.
Gums recalls.....
Last edited by gums; 8th Nov 2020 at 17:39. Reason: grammar
No fighter could go backwards faster than a Harrier.............
Tail slides and various departures probably beat the Harrier.....but not as a desirable option, and only temporarily if one was lucky.
