F-14 Tomcat retires

[fwa2500]

not much of an F-14 guy......

my top five current fighter:
1. Su-37 (what power)
2. MiG-29MK (great plane...period.)
3. MiG-21 (ok, ok, so its from the cold war...but what isnt? )
4. Saab Grippen (grat design)
5. Dassault Rafale (another great design)

classics (including cold war):
1. Fw-190 (what a plane....great looks too)
2. P-38F (nearly wet myself when Glacier Girl flew over my house at low altitude....what a sound from those twin Allison V12's)
3. F-104 (a real missile)
4. MiG-25 (another real missile....only faster )
5. F-4U (incredible sound from that engine.....)

top 3 planes of all time:
1. L-1011 Tristar
2. XB-70 Valkyrie
3. DC-8-51


lol, in short, i love planes and love to fly (note my signature )

[f1.redbaron]

Thank you manchild, very cool pictures. The F-104 was the GP car of the fighter community. It was a thoroughbred, the fastest of it's day, and very unforgiving. It required almost 200 MPH just to get airborne. And sadly, in the wrong hands or situation, it killed.
But in the right hands, it was incredilble in the skies, just an amazing performer.

I never really understood why waw Yeager so obsessed with that plane. He just loved it. If I remember correctly, USAF gave him one of those as a retirement present.

Btw, speaking of SU-27's (or 30's, 33's, etc..), here is one of the best pictures I've ever seen:




Their economy is horrible, but those guys car really build military aircraft.

[Scuderia_Russ]

Plane related link
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... sh&pl=true

[kilcoo316]

Hey guys, the cobra is all well and good, but have any of you seen the MiG-29 OVT?

Holy sweet Jeezzz, it makes the old standard Flanker B look like a B-52!!!

I've seen the stunts the F-22 is capable of, direct from the horse's mouth so to speak - but even it doesn't compare!

I have a couple of videos, of it and the Su-35 Super Flanker... both mighty impressive machines. I'll putfile the OVT one - its simply breathtaking what he does half way through!!!

http://media.putfile.com/MiG-29-OVT--MAKS-2005

[f1.redbaron]

Plane related link
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... sh&pl=true

Does that thing comes with airbags?

[DaveKillens]

When I first saw this picture I was sure it was a doctored photo of an aircaft taxying on the ground, and the landing gear masked out. But apparently, it's bona-fide. Wow.
597 She is flown by Russian Gromov Flight Research Institute`s senior test pilot, Kvochur, only 2 meters above ground,without extending landing gears! And notice that her refuelling probe is not retracted.
That is one heck of a pilot.

[manchild]

Isn't that less than 2 meters? I mean those vertical things below wings look like they are only 1 meter from ground.

[warmasice]

how good is the eurofighter in comparison with some of the (modern) fighter planes that have been mentioned?

[Smeerak]

Heh, in regards to the best sounding ...

We (had) a squadron of coverted Avenger's into water bombers...

Up where I used to go gliding, sometimes they would do their training manoevers in the early AM. Let me tell you, the sound of 5 Avengers in flying V formation 300 feet above the deck can be heard from MILES away and when they pass --- wow ... Makes an F1 start sound pathetic.

[kilcoo316]

how good is the eurofighter in comparison with some of the (modern) fighter planes that have been mentioned?

In terms of manouverability?

Well, it currently doesn't have thrust vector control and compares badly as a result, the MiG-29 OVT, Su-35 and F-22 would all be more manouvreable at most speeds.

But the tranche 3 upgrade is supposed to give it TVC I think, so that will change things of course.

[warmasice]

how good is the eurofighter in comparison with some of the (modern) fighter planes that have been mentioned?

In terms of manouverability?

Well, it currently doesn't have thrust vector control and compares badly as a result, the MiG-29 OVT, Su-35 and F-22 would all be more manouvreable at most speeds.

But the tranche 3 upgrade is supposed to give it TVC I think, so that will change things of course.

kilcoo316 - thanks for the info.

What about in terms of top speed and would it win a dog fight (generally speaking) in its current form against those that u mention?

Edit: i guess not, since its got less manouverability right?

[fwa2500]

unfortunatly, it all depends on who locks on and fires off the first missile these days, not really any pilot skills required.....but if in close and guns only, the MiG-29 or Su-37 would stomp it....im not saying its a bad plane, but i think the Typhoon isnt as much of a dig-fighter as a combo plane like the F-15E.....it also depends on the pilot's skills in close quarters.....does the F-22 even have a gun? im more into Russian fighters, lol

[kilcoo316]

unfortunatly, it all depends on who locks on and fires off the first missile these days, not really any pilot skills required.....but if in close and guns only, the MiG-29 or Su-37 would stomp it....im not saying its a bad plane, but i think the Typhoon isnt as much of a dig-fighter as a combo plane like the F-15E.....it also depends on the pilot's skills in close quarters.....does the F-22 even have a gun? im more into Russian fighters, lol

The F-15 (C or E) is an old plane, the design is getting on for 30-40 odd years old now. A Eurofighter would have it for lunch, its better in all departments. An F-16 on the other hand would be tougher, the F-16 would have a faster roll rate (I think) but has quite a restricted AoA envelope in comparison to modern machines.

As you said, it would depend on the pilot, and which could draw the other into a fight favouring his machine. The F-16 would prefer to get into a scissors fight, while the EF2000 would rather have sustained turns.

Indeed the F-22 has a gun, and would be the most manouverable of US aircraft at the moment (apart from giving away a little to the F-16 in terms of roll rate).


For the missiles, well there is a school of thought developing that radar guided BVR missiles are very inefficient and far from the be-all and end-all. This view is strongly backed up by all existing air combat data.

[Tom]

I would have thought that modern planes were far too fast for dogfights.

The pilots could never keep up.

Just lock a target and fire, from half way across the atlantic.

[DaveKillens]

The guns versus missile debate has been around ever since the technology for missiles matured in the 50's. But historicaly, in the end, guns have proved over and over that they are essential, and do most of the killing.
The Eurofighter is a new technology, just entering service just like the F-22. But they approach the problem of air superiority from two completely different philosophies, and solutions. The F-22 is an incredibly complex, sophisticated gold plated superplane that cruises the skies at supersonic speeds, and swats anything down that dares approach it's territory. But it's so expensive that even the US war budget can only afford a small handful.
The Eurofghter is much smaler, cheaper, and produced by a multinational consortium. If the RAF had the authority, they may have named it the Spitfire 2, because it's just that, a pure dogfighter, a skilled and very capable knifefighter. The entire machine is designed around manoeverability, and I believe that in a close-in one vs one scenario, it can take on and defeat anyone.