Best Fighter For It's Time

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).

I think the Navy is more concerned about getting rid of the F-14,
than extending their service life. The F-14 was bought as a
fleet defense fighter and that mission is not a major concern of
the Navy.

The carrier battle group has become the gun boat of the Twenty
First Century and the F-18 and F-35 are seen as better
multimission fighters.

David

"David Lentz" wrote in message


I think the Navy is more concerned about getting rid of the F-14,
than extending their service life. The F-14 was bought as a
fleet defense fighter and that mission is not a major concern of
the Navy.

And yet, even as it fades out of service, the F-14 is often touted as the
air wing's premiere strike asset.

The carrier battle group has become the gun boat of the Twenty
First Century and the F-18 and F-35 are seen as better
multimission fighters.

Which is a real pity. The Navy could probably have achieved almost
everything it got in the Super Hornet with a modernized F-14 (Tomcat-21, for
example) for far less effort.
--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

Subject: Best Fighter For It's Time
From: "ArVa"
Date: 7/24/03 12:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:


"Ed Rasimus" a écrit dans le message de
.. .
"ArVa" wrote:


But since the guy was about to retire and the Mirage was his last plane,
maybe he was a little bit biased. I guess (fighter) pilots have a natural
tendency to cherish their last bird more than the ones they have
previously
flown, don't they?

Regards,
ArVa


Well, for most of us, it's the first fighter, not the last that holds
the special place. Here's what no less a personage than Ernest
Hemingway had to say about love of fighters:

"You love a lot of things if you live around them, but there isn't any
woman and there isn't any horse, nor any before nor any after, that is
as lovely as a great airplane, and men who love them are faithful to
them even though they leave them for others. A man has only one
virginity to lose in fighters, and if it is a lovely plane he loses it
to, there his heart will ever be."

- Ernest Hemingway, August 1944.

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


I first thought that the plane you are about to fly for the *last* time was
the most important, as a career's achievement and the last opportunity to be
part of a rather special community. But reading your answer and Ernest
Hemingway's statement I guess both of you are right. I didn't pay attention
enough to the emotional factor.
As for me, I never had nor will have the opportunity to fly a fighter and I
don't own a horse so it just leaves me with the women (which is not so bad),
but if I do remember the first one, the last in date is the one I prefer...
:-)

Regards,
ArVa



To me it is the B-26 Martin Marauder. One in particular, " Willie the Wolf,
King Nine Jig. He had a stout heart of steel.
Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

In article , "Charles Talleyrand"
wrote:

My question is this: Which fighter had the clearest advantage over it's
the other fighters of it's time frame?

Tested but not fielded, I'll vote for the YF-12.
Just the test results changed the whole Soviet approach to attacking CONUS.
Not to mention the first look-down shoot-down doppler radar.
Shooting down a target flying at (IIRC) 1500 feet while ownship cruise at
70,000. Part of this was the missile of course, but no fighter a/c lives
in isolation without it's weapons.

Range, speed, altitude and weapons were clearly superior to anything else
flying at the time.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

Harry Andreas wrote:
In article , "Charles Talleyrand"
wrote:


My question is this: Which fighter had the clearest advantage over it's
the other fighters of it's time frame?


Tested but not fielded, I'll vote for the YF-12.

How about the F-101!? Fielded and tested...
Asbjorn

Asbjörn wrote:

How about the F-101!? Fielded and tested...
Asbjorn

Name one thing that the F-101 could do signifiicantly better than
other aircraft of the period--except for suddenly departing from
controlled flight at the most inopportune moments.


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

Ed Rasimus wrote:
Asbjörn wrote:

How about the F-101!? Fielded and tested...
Asbjorn

Name one thing that the F-101 could do signifiicantly better than
other aircraft of the period--except for suddenly departing from
controlled flight at the most inopportune moments.

Watching them as a kid around ADC bases, they *seemed* to
be able to outclimb the dueces and even the sixes (never saw
an F-104 fly until after the Voodoo's were sent off to Canada).
FWIW, they were definitely impressive (huge!) looking whether
on the ground or in the air and the roll rate was amazingly fast
for its size (wings level to 90-deg. angle-of-bank in the blink of
an eye). And a much sleeker, nicer looking twin-engined jet compared
to its younger, more capable F-4 brethren. Of course, no matter how
fast it could roll, the -101 turn radius was Boeing 727-like as the
-101 just seemed to continue flying straight regardless of
angle-of-bank 'till it reached the next county.

BTW, the -105 was equally as impressive due to its huge size, and
their long-legged gear hanging down and high angle-of-attack landing
approaches. Seemed the -101 and -105 flew the 360-deg. overhead
approaches at .9+ mach!

My vote for "best fighter for its time":
WW1-- Fokker D VII,
WW2 -- P-51D
Korea -- F-86A
Vietnam -- F-4E
Post 'Nam-to-Present -- F-15E

-Mike Marron

My list of revolutionary fighters

Fokker Eindekker (guns through the propeller arc, monoplane, wildly successful for it's time)
I-16 (I'm told this one)
Me-109 (first low-wing retractable gear used in large quantities)
Me-262 (First jet used in large quantities)
Harrier (VTOL)
F-117 (Stealth)

My list of other revolutionary aircraft
Bell Huey (first helo used in large numbers????)
AH-1 (first custom attack helo)
V-22 (first tilt-prop if it gets fielded)
B-70 (huge performance over other bombers but never fielded)
SR-71 (huge performance over any fighter)
E-4 AWACS (unique for it's day)

What's missing is the first fighter with a real AA missile/radar system that worked well.
Would that be the Mig-21/F-4/MirageIII or something else?

Finally, note I'm tempted to put the F-22 on this list not because of it's stealth or it's
performance (since these things have been done before) but because of it's networking
abilities. Would this be reasonable?