# little jet combat fiction project



## vanir (Oct 29, 2011)

Reason I put this in this section is some fact checking from the esteemed board members.

Just working on a little fiction project, in one scene a protagonist is looking over a NATO comparative testing field report. My sources are good, but I like to get feedback because they're varied, and when you're combining a fictional piece from a single source from multiple references it's good to see if it reads well.

So combined from references including USAF advanced flight training centre, the reformed Luftwaffe, a Fulcrum mechanic in the Czech Republic and bits and pieces, represented in a fictional 1998 NATO document for the novel, how does this read? Keep in mind it is 1998 and only what is known then is within the story environment. The tale is a fictionalisation of the Georgian crisis.



> In close combat dogfighting the early series MiG-29 has marginally superior but otherwise similar performance to the Block 15 series F-16A Fighting Falcon, whilst the Block 30 series F-16 and any F/A-18 Hornet fighters are marginally superior to the Fulcrum-A.
> 
> The FBW Block 40/50 series F-16C Vipers and current F-15C/D/E Eagle are comfortably superior to the Fulcrum-A owing partly to a much stronger airframe. Each aircraft have distinct advantages and disadvantages but on the whole the Fulcrum-A pilot is forced to work progressively much harder to achieve the same BFM results, particularly at low altitude.
> It is a dangerous combat aircraft which is harder to fly at the same level as comparative NATO models but at the same time has some higher limitations than most NATO fighters as altitudes rise. It is suggested that close combat be avoided.
> ...



I was thinking of course, too long, but I wanted to cover all the pertinent details.
I don't know the formatting such a report would be in.
It turns conversational towards the end, I want it to sound more official.


----------

