"John Carrier" wrote:

Duh? Here's where those qualifications come into play. While the F-14
with its programmed wing-sweep and well-BVR weapons had some
advantages over the F-15, when you get to close engagements, the Eagle
is considerably more agile than the Tom.

Well, not actually. The F-15 has sufficiently superior T/W to the F-14A
that through careful energy management and skill, the F-15 will win the
engagement ... but in terms of instantaneous turn, pitch rate, etc, it's not
quite the equal of the Tom. Put the F110 engines in (F-14B/D) and it's
quite different. T/W is almost equal and the F-14 has an advantage
throughout much of the envelope. I think the F-15 weapon's system is
superior in most environments ... obviously so when AMRAAM is in the mix
(personally I think those individuals that denied the F-14 the AMRAAM ought
to face charges).

The voice of experience is hard to disagree with. My impression had
always been that the Eagle was considerably more agile, but the AIM-54
and TWS ability to engage multiple targets simultaneously made the Tom
a very dangerous airplane. I'd have to look at the performance charts
and find some Ps corners to compare. Regardless of outcome, I'll stand
by the original challenge regarding the Tom having distinct
superiority over the Eagle.

My opportunities to engage the Eagle in the Turkey were somewhat limited,
but when gas was not an issue (ie: I had a tanker and the use of A/B) I had
little difficulty in gaining a pipper-on guns position.

You've said a mouthful there. If you can't have full reheat available
in every engagement you're distinctly handicapped.

OTOH, while in a Phantom, I found myself quite helpless. I think the only
thing I could do where I might have had no disadvantage was to depart the
jet. The single seat A-4 (as configured for adversary work) often
frustrated the "superior" F-15.\

My first encounter with a Tom while in a Phantom (an exercise in the
Med against America around '77) was to be intercepted during a low
(very) altitude attack on the boat. The -14 got vectored against me
from the left front quadrant--I picked him up visually at 10 o'clock
with about 150 degree heading crossing angle. Because I was (as usual)
very fast, I told the WSO--"no sweat, he's going to overshoot big
time" --followed immediately by an absolutely amazed, "holy ****, did
you see that" as the Tom did an incredible bat-turn into firing
parameters.

And regarding F-15s--I was often quite successful against Eagles when
working 2-v-2 in the lowly AT-38, provided the ROE was VID and the
Eagles were driven by relatively inexperienced guys. With a high-time
wingman and operating in fluid attack, we could run out of film taking
high angle gun shots.

To return to the topic, I'd cast a vote for the F-8. Best air superiority
fighter in the US arsenal for its era (mid-50's competing with century
series, etc). Best kill ratio in real world combat (Vietnam). Best ramp
strike rate ... oh well.

Kill ratio for the F-8 is the highest, but the numbers involved reduce
the stat to irrelevance. Not enough kills to be statistically
significant. Still, had there been enough of them and had the war been
one of air superiority, it sure would have been nice to have a whole
herd of F-8s.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (ret)
***"When Thunder Rolled:
*** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam"
*** from Smithsonian Books
ISBN: 1588341038