snip

I've got one source which gives 14 deg./sec. sustained for the F-15A, 16
deg.
instantaneous. The same source claims it can sustain 7.3g at 400
kts/15kft;
it's unclear if that's KTAS or KCAS, but I'm guessing the latter. It
credits
the F-5E with slightly over 11 deg. sec. sustained -- IIRC corner for it
is
around 375 or so. ISTR seeing the F-16A credited with ca. 16 deg./sec.
sustained. BTW, John, I've read that the (hard-wing) F-4 could generally
beat
the F-8 at low/medium altitude (once the pilots learned to use its energy
advantage), but at high altitudes the F-8's lower drag (induced, parasitic
and/or wave) gave it the advantage. What's your take?

Pretty good numbers, I think.

As to the F-8 versus F-4, you presented the prevailing conventional wisdom
of the time. When I was an F-8 guy, I felt I pretty much could have the
Phantom for lunch. But there was a time or two when the individual I
opposed transformed the jet into a serious adversary, "Who IS that guy?"

The F-8 had superior PsubS under G than the Phantom at altitudes above
15,000 feet, so any kind of classic turning fight (oblique loop, etc was the
thing in the tacmans at the time) played to its advantage. The Phantom was
more controllable very slow and enjoyed superior unloaded acceleration.
That points to a VERY vertical fight.

When I finally transitioned to the F-4, I thought, "No wonder it was so easy
to beat up on this jet." But, by the 500 hour mark I had changed to, "How'd
we EVER beat up on this jet?" The F-4 was the antithesis of the
point-and-pull fighter and required a great deal of finesse to fight well
(skills that many never achieved IMO). Once mastered, you could
successfully engage just about any aircraft of its generation ... albeit a
roller with a Mig-17 was ill-advised (hear that, Duke?). Of course, once
the next generation appeared (F-14 and subsequent), there really wasn't
anyplace to take the fight they couldn't go.

R / John