Northrop F-5 vs MiG-21

[Admiral Beez]

Basic comparison:

Both aircraft are simple to maintain, but I'd give the edge to the F-5, especially those with later life mods. As far as timed maintenance and component changes, I think the F-5 has the edge from what I remember. Operationally it will depend on who spots who first, if GCI is used to vector the MiGs and if the fight goes close in VR. I've been in the cockpit of both and I would rather be in the cockpit of an F-5 in a close in knife fight hands down. If I needed the speed, or course the MiG-21.

Range, F-5. Bomb load, F-5. Rate of climb, MiG-21. We also have to consider avionics and lastly (drumroll) pilot training.

I was surprised to see the F-5 get the nod on range. I've read that if equipped with wing tip missiles in lieu of tanks that the F-5 was on scosh fuel PDQ.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I was surprised to see the F-5 get the nod on range. I've read that if equipped with wing tip missiles in lieu of tanks that the F-5 was on scosh fuel PDQ.

View attachment 588006

The MiG-21 was even worse - without a centerline tank I think it had about a 30 minute duration if you punched the burner

 

[Admiral Beez]

The MiG-21 was even worse - without a centerline tank I think it had about a 30 minute duration if you punched the burner

It must be strange to be a fighter designer when you make the decision to omit sufficient fuel. I have to think that the original brief didn't call for much flight beyond a small circle of the airbase.

I wonder what the most agile yet longest range (on internal fuel) 2nd or 3rd generation jet fighter was? The Saab 35 Draken must be a contender with that big wing area holding large fuel tanks.

Just look at it fly... can the Draken take on a MiG-21?

 

[Dimlee]

The MiG-21 was even worse - without a centerline tank I think it had about a 30 minute duration if you punched the burner

There were many modifications. Early MiG-21F 1520 km, the last MiG-21bis 1210 km.
MiG-21M with 1050 km had the "shortest legs", probably.
MiG-21PF and export (for India) MiG-21FL both with 1600 km - probably the longest range in the family.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

There were many modifications. Early MiG-21F 1520 km, the last MiG-21bis 1210 km.
MiG-21M with 1050 km had the "shortest legs", probably.
MiG-21PF and export (for India) MiG-21FL both with 1600 km - probably the longest range in the family.

Those figures are at at it's optimal configuration and flight profile for cross country flight. I briefly worked on a MiG-21 PF. Internal fuel with the centerline tank to maintain CG on a flight where you might punch the AB and do some maneuvers will keep you in the air for about 30 minutes IIRC.

 

[SaparotRob]

I just checked Wikipedia. The F-5E had a range of 851 km (clean). Is that close?

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I just checked Wikipedia. The F-5E had a range of 851 km (clean). Is that close?

Sounds about right, combat radius with load about 120 miles. Now if you're going to ferry at cruise with external tanks, you're looking over 1000 miles.

 

[wlewisiii]

This thread makes me wish the F-20 hadn't withered on the vine as it did.

 

[SaparotRob]

This thread makes me wish the F-20 hadn't withered on the vine as it did.

I'm with you on that one. I'm no pilot but an airplane that hot has to be great.

 

[Glider]

It must be strange to be a fighter designer when you make the decision to omit sufficient fuel. I have to think that the original brief didn't call for much flight beyond a small circle of the airbase.

I wonder what the most agile yet longest range (on internal fuel) 2nd or 3rd generation jet fighter was? The Saab 35 Draken must be a contender with that big wing area holding large fuel tanks.

View attachment 588049

Just look at it fly... can the Draken take on a MiG-21?

The very first Draken didn't have an afterburner or a large tank of fuel. Then they put the afterburner in (for tests I should add) and it held the distinction of running out of fuel before it reached it's maximum speed.