Know Your Aircraft...

[Lt. James Cater 62]

I've been meaning to do this for some time but have now only gotten around to it. Knowing what an aircraft can and (sometimes more importantly) can't do is crucial to getting the most out one. Since this kind of discussion is pretty rare here i figured i might get the ball rolling.

 

I'll list only those that i have flown in combat enough to be able to really know the plane.

 

 

 

F-105D Thunderchief-Pros-Incredible low level speed, heavy bomb capacity, cockpit instruments well laid out, superior dive bomber. Cons- High wing loading, limited radar functions, handles poorly at altitude.

 

This is the plane i've got the most time in. Say what you will, but as far as getting the bombs

on the target and getting out alive, the Thud is hard to beat. It handles like a dog at altitudes above 20,000 ft, but it's in it's element down below. While capable of speed with a standard loadout, once rid of the bomb load it's virtually impossible to catch while in full burner at lower than 500ft. Not really meant to be used in any capacity other than as a strike aircraft. Using it as an Interceptor or CAP is pretty much futile due to both a rather simple radar setup and poor turning ability.

 

F-100D Super Sabre-Pros-Good cockpit visibility, superior gunsight, plentiful cannon ammo,decent fighter-bomber.Cons-Ocasional vicious handling drawbacks, no radar, poor acceleration.

 

The first production fighter capable of level supersonic speed. The Hun is somewhat of an enigma. Weather it performs very well, or very bad depends much on how one approaches aerial combat in this machine. Anyone attempting "Fangs out,Hair on fire" dogfighting is in for disaster as the F-100 will promptly become more of a danger to it's pilot than to the enemy. Yet, it can rack up if one is thinking ahead of the aircraft. The Hun can reward cerebral pilots in a big way. The gunsight gives you a very clear target picture while 1000 20mm rounds carried does lessen the worry of quickly running out of ammo that most other fighters give a pilot. 4 AIM9s are also a nice touch. In a pinch, it can also carry an acceptable load of A/G ordnance.

 

 

F-8E Crusader-Pros-Good handling, very good gun/missle arrangement, very manuverable at altitude,

Cons-Poor cockpit instrument layout, limited A/G loadouts compared to other fighters in the game.

The "last of the gunfighters" historically scored more missle than 20mm kills. Similar in performance to the MIG21, the Crusader does best at higher altitudes. A really good close in dogfighter to fly. The F-8 can arguably be considered a superior "pure" fighter than the Phantom. However, "pure" fighters are a rarity in these sims.

 

 

F-4 Phantom C,D,F-Pros-Good all around performance, jack of all trades versatility, superior radar fire control, powerful engines. Cons-Inferior turning ability compared to it's opponents,poor cockpit visibility, no gun in earlier models, no AIM7s in F model as well as limited gun ammo.

 

I do find it hard to fault the F-4 as far as overall performance. It can pretty much do damn near everything. If you want to survive combat the F-4 is a plane to strap into. The J-79s takes some credit. A whole lot of air to air survival is due to the sheer power of these engines. In an aircraft of this size and weight, it takes a lot of energy to get the advantage and General Electric produced a winner. The radar+Sparrows combo is tops, in the right envelope it can be decisive.

 

 

This is all for the moment. I'll add a couple of more next time.

[Lt. James Cater 62]

I forgot to add....post your impressions too!

[macelena 1,070]

Interesting topic, man. As far as i´m more done to air defense, i´ll talk about my two favs- apart of some you mentioned

 

F-104G. Pros: Excellent performance and visibility, nice maneuvering, good armament. Cons:Rather unstable, hard on its first flights

Never tried USAF versions, but i think that it´s more "dream" than "widowmaker". It only needs comprehensive pilots. If you can use its unstable flight,

and learn how to recover-avoid stall, it becomes a flying marvel."Be water, my friend"

 

F-106 Pros: Stability, good amount of ammo, easy handling. Cons: I don´t like its armament, lack of guns and poor missiles. Visibility is

rather... you better watch for yourself.

I don´t appreciate its performance, can´t climb and get speed at the same time satisfactorily. If flown for SCRAMBLE needs so much time to be airborne and at proper altitude. If in CAP, you better fight on BVR, as its armament is for bombers, in its role is wonderful, a bomber downer.

[TeTeT 0]

Flying the A-4 is quite nice. I like it for it's stable platform, it's great for learning bombing. It turns decently and I find scissors to be good for shaking off MiGs. The weapon load is for the size of the bird quite massive. On the downside, next to no acceleration and limited climb. I almost never go vertical. For survival, I reserve the right to chicken out on missions going Downtown. High threat environments with SAMs, AAA and MiGs lurking is best survived in the middle of a complete set of flights, running on your own is almost suicidal.

[Fubar512 1,350]

F-8E Crusader-Pros-Good handling, very good gun/missle arrangement, very manuverable at altitude,

Cons-Poor cockpit instrument layout, limited A/G loadouts compared to other fighters in the game.

The "last of the gunfighters" historically scored more missle than 20mm kills. Similar in performance to the MIG21, the Crusader does best at higher altitudes. A really good close in dogfighter to fly. The F-8 can arguably be considered a superior "pure" fighter than the Phantom. However, "pure" fighters are a rarity in these sims.

 

[gbnavy61 1]

I've got most of my hours in TMF F-8s and most of that is air-to-air.

 

Pros - Holds onto energy fairly well. Great acceleration and climb. Potent cannon and the ability to switch guns to use only two at a time - makes the ammo go a longer way. Pretty good endurance, particularly when you climb her up to altitude. Probably the best turn performance for a US jet of its day. Excellent roll/pitch rates. Flies the best clean, or with Sidewinders only. All around a great dogfighter. If you run into trouble, it usually leaves you the ability to light the burners and get out of dodge. Good basic gunsight.

 

Cons - Primary weapon is cannon which is prone to jams. Plagued by early, unreliable missiles. No long reach, like Sparrow-equipped F-4s. Can be hard to bleed enough speed to prevent the overshoot, at times. Limited air-to-ground capacity, and not really designed for moving mud in the first place. It can depart on you suddenly in a loaded roll at full back stick and full aileron. I lost one F-8 to a low altitude departure. A second time, I departed in a dogfight and got lucky nobody was in a position to shoot me while I recovered. Forward visibility is only average due to a lot of canopy structure out the front. Radar is short range. Cockpit instruments are located differently in different models and sometimes aren't placed well. No chaff/flares and only late models have internal ECM.

 

If I had to chose a jet to be over Indian Country in, I'd pick the F-8. Behind the boat, that's another matter.

Edited October 3, 2008 by gbnavy61

[+Dave 2,322]

F-106 Pros: speed, speed and speed. Also really good in a dogfight, as a few Eagle drivers found out. Cons. Poor missiles. lack of gun armament (until you add the gun pod.) Poor visibility.

 

F-105 Pros: Couldn't be caught on the deck....bomb truck. Cons, gulped gas, no turning ability.

 

F-8 Pros: Its an F-8, its all pros...there isn't any cons....It is the Mig Master. (I am a wee bit biased)

 

More later.

[DWCAce 19]

F-8 Pros: Its an F-8, its all pros...there isn't any cons....It is the Mig Master. (I am a wee bit biased)

 

 

Ha!

[krgf15 1]

Im a little partial to the A-4 for strike myself. What I do like better about the THUD is its RWR gear, as opposed to the A-4F being the only one. I kind of like the A-6 and A-7 also, but until the game gives some functionality to their real systems, I would just assume stick with the Scooter.

[Longestpants 1]

Anything that carries AGMs.

[kct 5]

F-14: It handles like a pig. But it would handle better than an F-15.

[Stick 773]

Nah I'd take the Eagle any day.Though I am partial to the Flanker as well, I'd pick the Eagle because it has brought me home against the worst of odds. If you are driving an Eagle there is a way.The trick is not to fight the way your enemy fights.

 

And the Mirage!Just a little edge...

[kct 5]

Oh, and the Strike Eagle makes a good bomb truck.

[+Dave 2,322]

F-14: It handles like a pig. But it would handle better than an F-15.

 

There is no F-14 that would ever out handle an F-15.

[krgf15 1]

There is no F-14 that would ever out handle an F-15.

Agreed

[kct 5]

There is no F-14 that would ever out handle an F-15.

 

And that depends on which F-14. P&W engines? Good luck on trying to outdo the Eagles. GE engines? It is another story.

 

This one is for Flankers: Pray that your missiles hit, and don't start going 'OMG MY SSSUUU-TWENTYYYY SEEEVEEENNN'S MIIISSSIIILLLEEESSS FAAAIIILLL'.

Edited October 4, 2008 by kct

[+Dave 2,322]

And that depends on which F-14. P&W engines? Good luck on trying to outdo the Eagles. GE engines? It is another story.

 

No model F-14 would out perform and F-15 in ACM. I love the Tomcat, I miss it being around. But it doesn't hold a candle to the F-15 in ACM.

[krgf15 1]

by the time the Tomcat was in full service with the GE, it was restricted on g's.

[Stick 773]

Exactly why the Israeli's took the Eagle instead of the Tomcat!

Agreed the Tom made the movies but it was the eagle that won the wars.

Even in the game;the Eagle has the edge in ACM;might take longer to come around especially with all that groaning but the Eagle climbs better, is faster on the deck and well... it is the Eagle!

 

I remember this engagement where a Flanker turned and ran full throttle,the Tomcat just couldnt catch up-outclassed in speed and climb ability!Had I been in an Eagle it would still have been advantage Flanker but with a very slim margin;had he slowed down or even turned I would have had him.

Edited October 4, 2008 by Stick

[kct 5]

Easy answer to all the argument: the F-22 will sweep all of them!

 

/me runs.

[johnrey 0]

And that depends on which F-14. P&W engines? Good luck on trying to outdo the Eagles. GE engines? It is another story.

 

This one is for Flankers: Pray that your missiles hit, and don't start going 'OMG MY SSSUUU-TWENTYYYY SEEEVEEENNN'S MIIISSSIIILLLEEESSS FAAAIIILLL'.

Though the Su-27 has superior manueverability, it has poor radar so the F-15s can take them out at longe range, with proper identification.

[+Dave 2,322]

Easy answer to all the argument: the F-22 will sweep all of them!

 

/me runs.

 

 

Duh, I could of told you that.

[kct 5]

Though the Su-27 has superior manueverability, it has poor radar so the F-15s can take them out at longe range, with proper identification.

 

Yeah, maneuverability is probably the biggest asset that the basic Flankers have, although alot can be said about the current generation of Flankers (especially the -30MKI/MKM).

 

@Dave: . And I forget the YF-23.

Edited October 4, 2008 by kct

[+Dave 2,322]

Though the Su-27 has superior maneuverability, it has poor radar so the F-15s can take them out at longe range, with proper identification.

'

The SU-27 has better maneuverability? I think that is debatable vs the F-15. The SU-30's I can see it. But the SU-27 and the F-15, I think is a even match.

[Stick 773]

Yeah, maneuverability is probably the biggest asset that the basic Flankers have, although alot can be said about the current generation of Flankers (especially the -30MKI/MKM).

 

@Dave: . And I forget the YF-23.

 

I wish we didnt behave so coy about our radar abilities during exercises.