Author Topic: History Channel says...... (Read 2873 times)

Cobra412 · « **Reply #30 on:** February 26, 2005, 01:47:07 PM »

T-Bolt our pilots have done many ACBT missions against the F-16. It really depends on how the engagement is setup. There has been times where our crews have beat the F-16 consistantly. There has also been times where the F-16 has beaten us consistantly. Mind you this is against some of our F-15s that don't have JHMCS and Link 16 capabilities. With these two systems installed the F-15 could use different tactics and it wouldn't be as vunerable in wvr engagements that are happening at lower speeds. The F-16s maneuverability is a bit better than ours at lower speeds while we are much better at higher speeds. There is just to many variables to account for to say one is absolutely better than the other.

Peregrin the F/A-22s acceleration is much better than the F-16 and it is a bit better than the F-15. Hence why we used the F-15s for chase birds when they were doing their high speed test missions. There were alot of test missions that required the F-15s to fly with the Raptors.

Higgins · « **Reply #31 on:** February 26, 2005, 04:16:05 PM »

I thinks it is unfair to try to compare naval and airforce planes speed and turning performance based on the requirements imposed on Naval planes for carrier landing and sea operations. Everything needs to be reinforced and heavier duty thus I would imagine with the radar and all additional weight in components the F-14 is much heavier than the F-15. From the landing gear and undercarriage support to the engines.

As far as the Mig-25's and Mig 31's go, didnt the Soviets run their speed tests with a stripped down plane without any radar electronics, ect to get their speed numbers and intimidate the West. From what I remember when the west finally got a hold of a real Mig 25 it was bogus on its speed numbers because of this. Just something I remember hearing. Good day!

Higgins

Slash27 · « **Reply #32 on:** February 26, 2005, 06:08:23 PM »

As far as the Mig-25's and Mig 31's go, didnt the Soviets run their speed tests with a stripped down plane without any radar electronics, ect to get their speed numbers and intimidate the West. From what I remember when the west finally got a hold of a real Mig 25 it was bogus on its speed numbers because of this.

They would never pad the stats., would they?

Seeker · « **Reply #33 on:** February 27, 2005, 06:24:02 AM »

Could some one define "supercruise"?

I know it's some kind of high speed regime; but what's the precise meaning?

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #34 on:** February 27, 2005, 06:33:15 AM »

Supersonic speed without use of an afterburner.

If it was ever achieved before the F-22 it was pretty rare.

Seeker · « **Reply #35 on:** February 27, 2005, 06:46:24 AM »

Ah; thx.

jaxxo · « **Reply #36 on:** February 27, 2005, 06:59:10 AM »

F-15 guys seem to be the ones that have the inferiority issues lol. Comparing takeoff powers is a bit silly considering the enormous thrust of TWO engines vs. one. The f-16 is more than capable of completing just about any mission you can give her, as well as being far cheaper and far easier to maintain. The ratio of flight time to maintenance time is about 6 hours of maintenance for every flight hour..thats just sick. Not sure about the 15 but i dont think its even close. As for dogfights the scenarios can be staged for either to defeat the other...generally the 15 has more powerful avionics due the the sheer size of the radar package..u need a dam crane to get it out. The f16 radar can easily be taken out by hand. F16s troops are very proud of their little falcon for its ability given its size..and so they should be

"Tumor all F-16 guys are like that. It still makes me wonder why the Air Force ever made the F-16 it's poster child."

This pretty much sums up the envy and jealousy of the mighty f15 troop. LOLOLOLOL

Furball · « **Reply #37 on:** February 27, 2005, 07:29:40 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Cobra412

Heck we made fun of the Tornados that were there with us doing photo recon. Couldn't help but raz their maintainers and ask them how much combat they had seen. Was also pretty funny to see an AIM9 mounted on the top of the wing. That was a first for most of us. Was kind of a ongoing joke throughout the AEF. Kept asking their weapons crews if they had realised they had the pylons mounted on the wrong side of the wing.

You mean Jaguars?

zorstorer · « **Reply #38 on:** February 27, 2005, 09:10:25 AM »

Now that is a tough little plane furball. I love the video of it taking off across the runway rather than down the runway.

leitwolf · « **Reply #39 on:** February 27, 2005, 09:35:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Supersonic speed without use of an afterburner.

If it was ever achieved before the F-22 it was pretty rare.

Concorde?

Cobra412 · « **Reply #40 on:** February 27, 2005, 02:44:18 PM »

Jaxxo you know I gotta give ya chit. Just wouldn't be right if I didn't. The T.O.s are the only thing that make us take it down with a crane. In some forward deployed areas we've taken the array down by hand. It's really not that heavy. It's more awkward than anything and because of how high the nose sits it makes it a bit difficult to get by hand.

As far as maintenance time it just really depends on the airframe itself. I have birds here that rarely required any kind of maintenance. Our F-16 counterparts were working more often than we were. They'd be troubleshooting one jet for atleast 2 to 3 shifts if not longer. If you start adding in through flight inspections and BPOs then our maintenance time goes up. Typically the reason it takes longer to do maintenance is due to the lack of parts at our forward supply points and waiting on support equipment. A typical failure on one of our systems can be repaired in just under a half an hour if AGE is there and there is a part at the forward supply point. That includes a 2 man crew doing setup/tear down, ,ops check, CAMS and forms.

Furball yep that's them. Got them mixed up. It's a very funny looking setup.

Holden supercruise had been achieved before the Raptor and it was done by the airfame it's supposed to replace.

Furball · « **Reply #41 on:** February 27, 2005, 03:09:05 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Cobra412

Furball yep that's them. Got them mixed up. It's a very funny looking setup.

Just shows why yanks shoot at so many brits... cant even i.d. their aeroplanes

Cobra412 · « **Reply #42 on:** February 27, 2005, 03:11:22 PM »

lol. Yeah yeah. Hey it was almost 5 years ago that I saw it. My memory isn't always that great when it comes to things I don't deal with constantly.

jaxxo · « **Reply #43 on:** February 27, 2005, 05:07:22 PM »

They both great planes...simple math though tells ya..2 engines+huge airframe = more maintenance= more money. Thats why f-16s sell so well internationally. ~~to all the af guys (even you cobra )~~

Tumor · « **Reply #44 on:** February 27, 2005, 05:10:50 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Cobra412
Tumor all F-16 guys are like that. It still makes me wonder why the Air Force ever made the F-16 it's poster child. Makes me giggle a bit because of a few incidents that happenend while I was in the desert. F-16 guys kept boasting about how good they were while we were deployed.

We were stationed in Turkey covering the Northern No Fly zone. One of our sister squadrons were there with us in the F-15Cs and us in our F-15Es. The F-16 Operations group that was there with us decided they were going put up some LGBs for the missions the next day. The AEF commander saw their config memo and told them to let the big boys take care of the bombing missions. They had to reconfig every bird late that night so they could go back to their SEAD role. The F-16 weapons crews were pissed.

The F-16 aircrews were a bit pissed too because every day we launched we came back empty. They were basically taking long and not so scenic tours of the desert. In the meanwhile we were bombing the hell out of the Iraqi AAA, SAM sites and relay centers for 45 days straight. The F-16s never even had a chance to launch on any targets while we were there. That was the most ordinance that had been dropped on Northern Iraq since the end of the Gulf War. We had dropped more ordinance in the first 3 days than our sister squadron that was there before us had done in their whole 45 day rotation.

It was also pretty amusing to watch an F-16 try to max climb on one of our down days from flying in the AOR. The F-16 took off and did a max climb. Right after they got half way down the strip our F-15E started rolling down the runway. Right about the time the F-16 leveled off our F-15 screamed pass him still in a max climb and leveled off about 7 thousand feet above the F-16. Needless to say they didn't try to out do us in max climbs after that for the rest of our rotation.

It's always fun to have those kind of inner wars going on between squadrons. Heck we made fun of the Tornados that were there with us doing photo recon. Couldn't help but raz their maintainers and ask them how much combat they had seen. Was also pretty funny to see an AIM9 mounted on the top of the wing. That was a first for most of us. Was kind of a ongoing joke throughout the AEF. Kept asking their weapons crews if they had realised they had the pylons mounted on the wrong side of the wing.

I know I know hehe... it's very likely I was down at Eskan in the Targets shop same time you were up there. The "Viper" aint bad... it just aint all that

Why the AF made it our poster-child will always be a mystery to me.