Blackhawks.
- Thread starter Swanson10
- Start date
Damn, Obama got home from the ISU game fast if he was landing that early. Did he leave at halftime or something???
I'm a bit of an aviation buff
I know a few aviation buffs and there ain't none of them that know the stuff you are talking about. Planes maybe...missels...not even close. Yooouu Mr. Jumbo know more than you are letting on. :skeptical:
Good info to read though.
I know a few aviation buffs and there ain't none of them that know the stuff you are talking about. Planes maybe...missels...not even close. Yooouu Mr. Jumbo know more than you are letting on. :skeptical::skeptical:
Good info to read though.
Hah there are a TON of boards where people talk about stuff like this allllll the time.
Nothing you can't pick up by reading wikipedia and places like F-16.net.
Here's a good read about F-16 vs F-14 for instance:
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-11188.html
No offense, but I'll side with the experts from the "book" on this.
I'll give you that close up its no match for the other planes, but it never was intended for that. Its weapons system was designed to knock out targets before they could get anywhere close to it.
Its operational record shows it could establish air superiority with its mere presence.
Cool stuff, thanks for posting the link. You could get lost in there for hours, days , months and not have time to read what you went in there for. It has stuff that's almost as technical as CF
Feel free
Lots of "experts" write books.
The veracity of your first claim depends greatly on the definition of "targets".
The veracity of the second really doesn't have a whole lot of truth in actuality. The two most famous F-14 shoot downs over the Gulf of Sidra and were AIM-9 and close-in AIM-7 shots against targets that were challenging their air superiority.
Both shots that F-18s, 16s or even F-4s could easily have taken.
I've got nothing against the F-14. It's probably the most gorgeous fighter ever to fly. It's also a lot prettier than it is/was capable compared to the stuff we have had for the last couple of decades now.
i think we should get this to fly over
independence day anyone????
Nah... F-18's can take 'em down using only a parachute
Feel free
Lots of "experts" write books.
The veracity of your first claim depends greatly on the definition of "targets".
The veracity of the second really doesn't have a whole lot of truth in actuality. The two most famous F-14 shoot downs over the Gulf of Sidra and were AIM-9 and close-in AIM-7 shots against targets that were challenging their air superiority.
Both shots that F-18s, 16s or even F-4s could easily have taken.
I've got nothing against the F-14. It's probably the most gorgeous fighter ever to fly. It's also a lot prettier than it is/was capable compared to the stuff we have had for the last couple of decades now.
These experts were ex and current pilots, and other ex-Air Force and Navy personnel. The Gulf of Sidra and how it shook out was not the strong suit of the F-14. While those other aircraft could of taken the same shots, the F-14 could take shots the others cannot, like from waaayyy long distances. The F-14 was never put into a situation (to my knowledge) that it was truly designed for; long range, guns a blazin' interception (destroy).
Anyway, I actually don't think it is anywhere close to the most beautiful fighter ever to fly. Going back in history a bit, I think that title is the Spitfire's hands down. In the jet age, I'd go with the F-86, and in the more modern era, I've always liked the MiG-29.
And actually for Air Force I'd say we have a good shot at getting an F-22 here
After all, the F-15's are falling out of the sky, and the F-16's are too busy doing all the work the F-22 should be doing but isn't because it's too expensive to lose so they only use them at air shows instead of sending them to either war zone
Won't happen. USAF has F-22's spread pretty thin, and are stationed at Tyndall, 1st Fighter, Holloman, Elgin, Nellis, Edwards, Elmendorf, and soon at Hickam. Quite a hike to Ames, Iowa for an ISU game. We would be lucky to get F-16s from the 132nd in DSM.
P-47 Thunderbolt "The Jug" was the best fighter in WWII. 8 50cals. Durability. Better combat record than the P-51 Mustang, and P-40 Warhawk.
Gross.
It was put in situations every day that it was designed for. It intercepted Russian bombers constantly.
And it was designed to take those very long range shots against large, non-maneuvering targets flying in straight lines.
The AIM-54 was only fired twice in combat and missed both times after the adversary (Iraqi Mig-25s) turned and ran, thus defeating the missile kinematically, which is trivially easy to do on long range shots like that (especially in a fast plane like a Mig-25). It's also why the SA-5 isn't really a good choice for taking pot shots at fighters from 100+ miles away.
Again, it's a scary weapon if you're flying a Tu-95. Not so much if you're in a Mig-29. And, at that point, the Aegis guys running picket are probably a better system anyway if you're really looking for fleet defense.
There's a reason the AIM-54/AWG-9/APG-71 system didn't spread to other platforms...it was expensive (1 mil+ a shot) and not very useful compared to the alternatives (AIM-120, chief amongst them).
So, in close, against a maneuvering target, it's more likely you'd see an AIM-7 shot, of which the AWG-9 can support only one at a time, and you've gotta keep the target lit up with CW the whole time (+/- 65 degrees off the nose of the jet) which is a big problem when the other guy can shoot back at you before the missile times out (or he's got a wingman or three that can help him out). Or you've gotta get in close for an AIM-9, or guns.
Compared to an AA-12 or AIM-120 armed platform that can launch and leave (and it won't be hard to see a gigantic cat coming at you no matter how crap your radar is), you're at a massive disadvantage.
Looks, not overall performance. On both accounts. I know the MiG isn't going to get too many votes, but something about the lines of it I have always liked, curvy and edgy at the same time. Admittedly a bit crude though.
I suppose if you talk WWII performance records (victory totals), the Bf-109 is the best... If you are talking a one-on-one match, Me-262 would whup em' all. (had to be a smart ***:wink
Last edited:
