# Top 5 today's military jet's



## Chief (Oct 7, 2006)

All right this is the question of the day. What do you guys consider today's Top 5 military Jet's. 

Any role. Could be fighter, bomber, Fighter/Bomber or any mulit-role aircraft.
Can be a retired jet.

I don't want to say because at the moment I'm only knowledgeable about US aircraft and I don't want to sound biased.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 7, 2006)

Okay todays jets:

1. F-22
2. Typhoon
3. Su-27
4. F-15
5. F-16

All jets still in service today.


----------



## Gnomey (Oct 7, 2006)

My list would be the same as Chris's. It would change though when the F-35 comes into service.


----------



## Chief (Oct 7, 2006)

How would you rate the F/A-18 Super Hornet? More of a propaganda plane?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 7, 2006)

Not a bad plane but does not rank with the ones in my list in my opinion.


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 7, 2006)

I would specify the F15 as the "E" model.

I think the air to air version is getting dated.

The F18 "super Hornet" is definetly a good, but not great fighter.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 7, 2006)

syscom3 said:


> I would spesify the F15 as the "E" model.
> 
> I think the air to air version is getting dated.
> 
> The F18 "super Hornet" is definetly a good, but not great fighter.




The F-15E is really a bomber.....


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 7, 2006)

Still a fighter though.

I chose that because its the worlds premier Fighter-Bomber.


----------



## Chief (Oct 8, 2006)

Well actually I would put the A-10 Warthog on my top 5 at least my top 10. It's an excellent aircraft designed for a specific purpose. Close air support and it accomplished that and than some. It could take out anything on the ground, it could move, it could take a beating, and it is extremely maneuverable so in a way it could hold it's own in a dog fight.

The A-10 was made for a purpose and it passed it with easy. Ugly as sin maybe, but beauty is skin deep my friend.

I know I said I wouldn't post my Top 5, but I will anyway. This is based of the jet's I know.

Top 5:

1. F-22
2. F-15
3a. F-16
3b. F-14 
They're tied. I like them both.
5. A-10

Like I said this is off of the jet's I know thus far, but before I leave this thread I'm sure I will learn of others. So my top 5 will change eventually as I become familiar with Jets of other countries.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 8, 2006)

syscom3 said:


> Still a fighter though.
> 
> I chose that because its the worlds premier Fighter-Bomber.



The CO of the OPS Group I work with is an "E" driver (a bird colonel) He has said the primary mission is to bomb - sure it can do an air-to-air mission with no problem but the mindset from it's pilots it to emphasise on it's ability to drop bombs. He even joked saying it's designation should be changed to "B-15."


----------



## v2 (Oct 8, 2006)

1. F-22
2. F-15
3. F-16
4. Typhoon
5. F-14


----------



## P38 Pilot (Oct 8, 2006)

Here's mine for fighters/attack:
1. F-22
2. F-16
3. F-15
4. F-18
5. A-10-May not be a fighter, but a very good attack aircraft!

We can also mention bombers, right?

1. B-52
2. B-2
3. B-1B


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 8, 2006)

Typhoon? Not much flexibility in the current Mk's. A recognized mistake from legacy cold war thinking.


----------



## plan_D (Oct 8, 2006)

It's not a mistake. Multi-role only makes the defence budget cheaper, it doesn't mean the plane's are any better. If Britain has a specialised air superiority fighter, and a specialised ground attack aircraft it only means the budget has to be higher for running two different types. 

I'm glad the Typhoon isn't a jack of all trades, master of none. It's replacing that terrible "fighter" we call the F.3 Tornado! At least a Typhoon snap rolling doesn't take half it's development time to do so...  All you need now is a load of GR.4s for the ground work ... better still, something that works and is cheaper! At least the GR.4 has FLIR on it.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 9, 2006)

Matt308 said:


> Typhoon? Not much flexibility in the current Mk's. A recognized mistake from legacy cold war thinking.



Negative, the aircraft is amazing. Got to see it fly at an airshow and its capabilites are amazing as well. The only set back that puts it behind the F-22 is the F-22s stealth capability.


----------



## Gnomey (Oct 9, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Negative, the aircraft is amazing. Got to see it fly at an airshow and its capabilites are amazing as well. The only set back that puts it behind the F-22 is the F-22s stealth capability.



I'd agree with that Chris (which is why my list is the same as yours). The two times I have seen the Typhoon on display (Leuchars 2005 and 2006), it puts on a great show. It has everything that the F-22 has apart from stealth.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 9, 2006)

Yeap, very neat aircraft. I just think that they should have gone ahead and designed a stealth type aircraft instead and then they would have everything they needed.


----------



## Gnomey (Oct 9, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Yeap, very neat aircraft. I just think that they should have gone ahead and designed a stealth type aircraft instead and then they would have everything they needed.



Perhaps they might later with some modifications, but they would probably hamper the aircraft to much to be of any use. I would agree though they should of designed a stealth aircraft from the outset but the Typhoon is already 6 years later or something like that.


----------



## RE2005 (Oct 9, 2006)

Well, this is my top 5 list:
1-SU37
2-F15
3-MiG29
4-EFA
5-F18
Nick


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 10, 2006)

i assume the EFA's the E2000 or Eurofighter Typhoon? and i wouldn't really put the F/A-18 on any list, there are better fighters and better bombers out there, what makes her good is that there are few better combinations of both..........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 13, 2006)

I agree. The F-18 is a great aircraft but I dont think she ranks up there with the greatest.


----------



## mkloby (Oct 16, 2006)

From what I understand does not the Super Hornet's radar APG-79 outclass the radar in the F-16? That is extremely important, especially if you are thinking of air to air engagements. Also, it is a carrier based plane - much more flexible than ground based. Plus it's ability to also carry out a wide array of missions, just like the other A/C mentioned. Some points to think about, especially since the Super Hornet isn't getting any of the love I think it does deserve.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 16, 2006)

I think the Super Hornet is a great aircraft and very versatile but when compared to other aircraft such as the F-15, Mig-29, Su-27, F-16 and Typhoon and F-22 she does not quite reach there level of versatility or maneuverability or performance.

The F-15 is just a given.
The Mig-29 will out perform and maneuver.
The Su-27 is a given like the F-15.
The F-16 has had more of an impact, better performes and is just as versatile.
The Typhoon will out perform and outmaneuver and has great avionix package and radar package.
The F-22 well do I need to go there...


----------



## mkloby (Oct 16, 2006)

Well I'm going against the grain and saying that F/A-18E/F is a better asset than the 16. I'm not a tech guru but appears the radar package is better, it is still a versatile A/C, plus IT OPERATES FROM CARRIERS! It doesn't need Air Force special ops to seize an airfield in a hostile country in order to operate, be refueled 63 times enroute, or rely upon a friendly neighbor to supply a forward air base. Big advantage there the air force can't touch. Isn't the Fulcrums avionics considerably obselete as well? Being a little more maneuverable is not as big of an advantage when you can be engaged by enemy radar outside of your radar's zone.


----------



## davparlr (Oct 16, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> The only set back that puts it behind the F-22 is the F-22s stealth capability.




That's like saying about a battleship in comparison to an aircraft carrier that the only set back that puts it behind the aircraft carrier is that it can't launch and retrieve aircraft.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 17, 2006)

No I am saying that for non stealth aircraft the best one out there right now is the Typhoon. If it had stealth capability it would be on par with the F-22.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 17, 2006)

Perhaps. However, UK is scrambling for that added flexibility that will not arrive until later marks. Certainly the Typhoon is a quite capable aircraft. Let's face it. In today's world, if the aircraft is not multirole, development has to rely solely upon domestic market...and we all know that cannot be accomplished. Even the US is struggling with F-22 procurement for exactly that reason. I don't give a rats about any airframe being perhaps the best air superiority fighter, if you can't buy them in sufficient quantities. Multirole allows for increased flexibility, better matches current operational scenarios and is easier to market internationally. All that means lower recurring costs and ability to keep the technical expertise in country.

And don't kid yourself that stealth is the only difference between F-22 and Typhoon. C3I management and information exchange are probably the most lethal weapon the F-22 possesses. And you won't read about those capabilities for obvious reasons.


----------

