Author Topic: Best Fighter Aircraft of the 60's and early 70's debate !! (Read 5000 times)

Thrawn · « **Reply #60 on:** March 22, 2004, 09:58:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by SunTracker
Canada also tricked a U.S. aircraft carrier into thinking a lighthouse was another ship-

NOT

Of course not, but my statment isn't that unbelievable if given proper context.

Does anyone know how many training flights a month USAF F-15 pilots went on, in the late 70s early 80s?

Glasses · « **Reply #61 on:** March 22, 2004, 10:06:47 PM »

Crusader although the Phantom holds a special place in my heart for being the workhorse of the 60s as far as fighters go.

Still the F-8 is coolest

NUKE · « **Reply #62 on:** March 22, 2004, 10:09:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
A couple of Canadian pilots in CF-104s shot down a couple F-15s in a two on two exercise. To add insult to injury, the Canadians flew the entire engagement with flaps and wheels down.

PS: NEVAR FORGET THE ARROW!!

Yeah, the Arrow was so good, I bet it could be world class today....unlike the F-15.

Truth is that the Arrow was a waste of money and it's mission was outdated almost before it flew.

Thrawn · « **Reply #63 on:** March 23, 2004, 02:07:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
Yeah, the Arrow was so good, I bet it could be world class today....unlike the F-15.

Who said the F-15 wasn't any good. No one. Are you seeing things.

Quote

Truth is that the Arrow was a waste of money

It was a waste of money, it might not have been if they had completed the order.

Quote

and it's mission was outdated almost before it flew.

So we went on to replace the Bomarks with Voodoos why?

-dead- · « **Reply #64 on:** March 23, 2004, 09:05:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by gofaster
Phantom for its versatility, Crusader for dogfighting prowess, B-52 for longevity.

I'd put the B-52 down as one of the worst fighters ever.

bpti · « **Reply #65 on:** March 23, 2004, 09:24:16 AM »

F105!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Vermillion · « **Reply #66 on:** March 23, 2004, 01:06:35 PM »

Wow... talk about reviving a dead thread.

I'd like to see the source on the F-104 vs F-15 story

The F-105 while it did great service is not really a fighter. It was pretty much designed to be a bomber, and thats how it flew. Calling it a lead sled is not inaccurate in the least.

I see a lot of people are fans of the F-8. Which was a good plane. But I wonder why most people discount the MiG-19S and the MiG-21's. Both were excellent fighters for their time, and given equal pilots..... well its a moot point isn't it

vorticon · « **Reply #67 on:** March 23, 2004, 01:50:52 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by NUKE
Yeah, the Arrow was so good, I bet it could be world class today....unlike the F-15.

Truth is that the Arrow was a waste of money and it's mission was outdated almost before it flew.

1. doubt it could be world class today but it would lasted for a while...and its successor would be good...

2. actually the cost to create a single arrow was quite a bit less than the cost canada payed a few years later to buy planes from the USA...it certainly outclassed the other fighters of its day...and how could its mission be outdated before it flew if not to many years later we purchased american planes for the same mission?

the iriqous engine would have had a 1:1 weight:thrust ratio...and it had a ceiling of 75 000 feet...the only thing on it that would have been "outdated" on it was the BOMARC missiles...

MotorOil · « **Reply #68 on:** March 23, 2004, 03:58:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by MC_Honky
Thank GOD the Canadians have not come on this board with their "THE AVRO-ARROW WAS THE BEST PLANE EVER!"

Was just thinking about that.

Avro-Arrow gets my vote. Would have eaten the F-4 alive as an interceptor. Probably wouldn't have been that great in the ground attack roll.

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #69 on:** March 23, 2004, 04:35:10 PM »

Laser
you may want to exspand your P-47 thing then? I do not think the airforce kept many past like 55 in reserve or gaurd units.

I do not think it was used at that much in South america I do not think the french used it, but I could be wrong..

I am pretty sure it never saw service in Vietnam after WW2.

AVRO1 · « **Reply #70 on:** March 23, 2004, 06:34:26 PM »

AVRO ARROW gets my vote too.

But then I am biased since I am CANADIAN.

Many of AVRO'S enginneers went on to work for NASA and on the Concorde after Diefenbunker's stupid decision.

Edited for cause of memory holes cause by those damn aliens night visitors.

Torque · « **Reply #71 on:** March 23, 2004, 06:42:34 PM »

It was Diefenbaker that canned the Arrow, Pearson was LBJ's biatch.

There is still a few 1/4 scale test prototypes on the bottom of Lake Ontario.

Thrawn · « **Reply #72 on:** March 23, 2004, 09:29:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Vermillion
Wow... talk about reviving a dead thread.

I'd like to see the source on the F-104 vs F-15 story

You would have to come to Ottawa.

My father told me the story a while ago. He was part of the ground crew with a couple CF-104 squadrons (441 and the 429), which were part of 1 Canadian Air Group at Candian Forces Base Baden-Soligen. He heard the story sometime between 79-84.

I could just be BS. But it wouldn't surprise me if it true. The 104 pilots were apparently going on 1 to 2 training sorties a day and that sounds like a hell of alot to me. And after all I thought the mantra here was, "It's the pilot, not the plane.".

There's a fellow on this BBS that was also with the 429, he may know more about it.

Wolfala · « **Reply #73 on:** March 23, 2004, 09:59:13 PM »

Range typical: 800 m without overwing tanks

800 meters without overwing tanks...sounds like my P38!!!!!

Vulcan · « **Reply #74 on:** March 23, 2004, 10:20:41 PM »

I remember back when I was in Air Cadets there was an ANZUS exercise in Aussie, two RNZAF Skyhawks bounced and got gun kills for two F-15's.

Our Skyhawks had no radar, no locking equipment, just cannons or IR IIRC...