Modelling > Scenarios
Best Air Superiority Fighter, 1956-1968
Logan Hartke:
--- Quote from: Jeffry Fontaine on January 09, 2018, 06:44:06 AM ---F-6A (F4D) Skyray seems to have been overlooked or ignored.
--- End quote ---
That's fair to assume, since the "Ford" often gets overlooked, but that's not the case here. I love the Skyray, and I think it's the prettiest fighter of the Cold War. It looks like something from a sci-fi film. My grandpa server on the USS Ranger during the late '50s and early '60s and I remember looking through his cruise books with him and thinking that it was the most beautiful plane in any of the pictures by a very wide margin. It's gorgeous, and one of my favorite fighters of all time.
It has four 20mm cannons, could carry four Sidewinders, had a decent range, good speed, incredible rate of climb, and legendary maneuverability. I absolutely love it.
All that having been said, it was not without its faults. While many of its pilots loved it, many others considered it to be a very, very tricky plane to fly in an era of persnickety jets. A few were kept on hand long after it had been retired from service purely to show test pilots just what it was like to fly an inherently unstable aircraft. Also, compared to all the supersonic aircraft on this list, the F4D could be left behind and evaded, being limited to subsonic level flight.
In a different world, had the Navy selected the F5D Skylancer instead of the F8U Crusader, I wouldn't be posing the question. That would be my choice until that advent of the F-4E...if not later. But, that's not really the scenario I'm working with here. I'm asking about "best" versus "favorite". The F4D may be my "favorite", but my judgement is not clouded enough that I consider it to the best, despite how sad it makes me to admit it.
Cheers,
Logan
jcf:
--- Quote from: kitnut617 on January 09, 2018, 06:56:01 AM ---I've read that the EE Lightning was very maneuverable, besting most western fighters of the time and only got beaten when the F-16 came into service. Read a report where the RAF tested it against a Spitfire, it was to test it's suitability's against Indonesian P-51's during that confrontation.
--- End quote ---
All well and good if the enemy comes to you.
Otherwise, maneuverability is moot if you constantly have to break-off because of nil fuel. ;D
elmayerle:
I have to wonder how the handling and performance of the Crusader would have been affected if the J57 had been replaced by the J79 at some point? The J79 is smaller and lighter for the same performance, but also runs hotter and might require some material changes in the engine bay.
It would be fascinating to see some DACT fights between Crusaders and Drakens.
Rickshaw:
The Mirage is IMO the standout machine in the list. Despite what you claim, Logan, it was a very manoeuvrable aircraft as the RAAF showed whenever they flew against the US's F-5 Aggressors. They invariably bested them by a wide margin. It may have done that, despite all the limitations you list. BTW, the R.530 had interchangeable homing heads - IR and Semi-Active Radar homing. The missile itself had problems, as you note but with an IR head most of the criticisms directed at its SARH version are eliminated. The Cyrano radar was typical of radar of the period - the late 1950s-early 1960s. When it worked, it worked well, when it didn't, it was a dog.
The later models of the Lightning overcame most of the criticisms about it's range, particularly when carrying the two big over-wing tanks. What it lacked was a BVR missile - something you admit isn't a big bad thing. It's two missiles were pretty unique - Firestreak because it was designed, back to front. Redtop because it provided "improved" IR detection, being able to be fired outside of the rear envelope of it's target. Both were complex and relatively slow to warm up and only had a limited time frame in which they were cold enough to sense a hot target. What it really lacked was enough range without the tanks. I'd replace the missiles with an optional two Sidewinders on each side. It was the only fighter to successfully intercept the SR-71 on several occasions.
The F8 was a bit of a dog in many ways, particularly in it's underpowered early versions. It did have a BVR missile - the AIM-9C but it was a bit of a dog and not widely used. The gun feed was a real problem, causing frequent stoppages at the worst moments.
The Draken was politically held over by the Swedish Government(s) of the day. It also suffered from initially no radar and then a bad radar until the bugs were worked out (which wasn't uncommon). It was a good all rounder, like the Mirage III. Both of those aircraft however lacked range.
I am surprised that you've not included the F-5 in your list. It was cheap, easily available and quite a good fighter. It could carry as many missiles as the others (four) and with some tinkering I don't doubt it could carry more on multiple launchers. It's guns were reliable. What it lacked was a good radar. It's range was also a bit limited without tanks. It was quite a good air-superiority fighter and that was why it excelled in the Aggressor role.
Old Wombat:
--- Quote from: Rickshaw on January 09, 2018, 10:43:39 AM ---... Despite what you claim, Jon, ...
--- End quote ---
[whisper]I think you mean "Logan", mate![/whisper]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version