Lucky13
Forum Mascot
Who would be the first up (pilot on stand by, in ready room) and the last one standing? No missiles, just guns here....let's go for places, 5-4-3-2-1. 
SAAB J35D v MiG-21 v Mirage IIIE v E/E Lightning F3 v F-8E Crusader?
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
Assuming ready room to cockpit time is the same, I would say, without a doubt, no. 1 would be the F-8E since it would be on a carrier therefore short taxi (none if pre-positioned on a catapult) and VERY short takeoff run. The rest probably all roughly the same with only the positioning of ready room and location of aircraft to the runway.
yulzari
Staff Sergeant
First one to height would be a Saunders Roe SR177........................
GregP
Major
E.E. Lightning, no doubt. Go watvh a typical departure ...
And this one is a 2-seat trainer!
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CDLbokf9sg
And this one is a 2-seat trainer!
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CDLbokf9sg
Gixxerman
Senior Airman
I'm a big fan of the Lightning, lovely aircraft.
Shame it had such short 'legs' (at least to begin with until the big belly tank...and even then?) was difficult to hang weapons off (tho the use of over-wing tanks was always a fairly unique in my eyes mean look.
Shame it had such short 'legs' (at least to begin with until the big belly tank...and even then?) was difficult to hang weapons off (tho the use of over-wing tanks was always a fairly unique in my eyes mean look.
Glider
Captain
Lightning, Crusader, J35, Mig 21, Mirage IIIe
Hypothetical question of course, but I would place my bet on Draken. The scramble time of Swedish and Finnish Drakens at the height of the Cold War was rather below than over 2 minutes. Draken's maneuverability at low speeds and altitude is also underrated. And yes, I might be biased but having seen F-16, F-18, JAS-39, AJ-37, MiG21 bis and J35
Draken performing live and some of them in action, Draken is my all-time favourite. I think Finnish Air Force Fighter Squadron 11 vets would back me up on this: Saab J35 Draken is simply the best and most beautiful fighter jet ever!
Draken performing live and some of them in action, Draken is my all-time favourite. I think Finnish Air Force Fighter Squadron 11 vets would back me up on this: Saab J35 Draken is simply the best and most beautiful fighter jet ever!
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Not realistic but if missiles are forbidden I would pick the F-8. It was called "last of the gunfighters" for a reason. Second choice would be Mirage III based on war record with Israeli pilots. They scored quite a few gun kills with this aircraft.
For low level fight I think Hawker Hunter is worthy of consideration. Very maneuverable and it was armed with four 30mm ADEN revolver cannon.
If the competition is simply about climbing to altitude I would pick the E/E Lighting. Not the best combat aircraft but it could climb like a bat out of Hell.
For low level fight I think Hawker Hunter is worthy of consideration. Very maneuverable and it was armed with four 30mm ADEN revolver cannon.
If the competition is simply about climbing to altitude I would pick the E/E Lighting. Not the best combat aircraft but it could climb like a bat out of Hell.
Glider
Captain
People tend to focus on the Lightning's speed and climb and tend to forget that it had for its time a very advanced radar / missile combination. The Red Top missile and its associated radar gave it a considerable advantage over any of the other aircraft which relied on the Sidewinder / Atoll missiles.
As for the Hunter its a special aircraft as its the only one I have any experience of, but its greatest fan would have to admit that not carrying an air to air missile was a major drawback for the RAF units that flew it. I know tat some overseas air forces did arm them with air to air missiles
As for the Hunter its a special aircraft as its the only one I have any experience of, but its greatest fan would have to admit that not carrying an air to air missile was a major drawback for the RAF units that flew it. I know tat some overseas air forces did arm them with air to air missiles
davebender
1st Lieutenant
Why is that an issue for this scenario which uses guns only?
Glider
Captain
Fair point
parsifal
Colonel
Mig-21 vs EE Lightning
Mig-21 can turn tighter than Lightning, so in a turning fight the "bleed-off" won't matter, as Lightning won't last long enough to make Mig-21's turn rate deteriorate. In a straight-line fight, Lightning accelerates far faster than Mig-21 and has a better rate of climb, so it can engage/disengage at will... until it runs out of fuel.If Lightning initiates, expect 1 or two passes then it runs for home, with Mig-21 probably dying.If Mig-21 initiates, Lightning probably dies before it can accelerate out of danger. Mig-21 probably attacks out of a dive.Interesting "dogfight"... two aircraft primarily designed as bomber-interceptors trying to fight each other.
Mig-21 vs SAAB J35D
In the early years the (older) Draken was the better fighter. Why? Because of its radar, fire control system, weapons and the connection to the swedish air control system. The Draken was aerodynamically the best fighter of its time. The B-Draken was able to attack from the front earlier than the MiG-21.
The F-Draken had a very sophisticated Pulse-Doppler-Radar from Ericsson and a very good fire control system. They fired radar-guided RB27 an heat seeking RB28 missiles, which were improved versions of the AIM-26B and AIM-4D Falcon from Hughes. The (modified) danish Draken were superb attack planes, too.
That all said, the MiG-21 was an important plane for the East Block member states, built in high numbers. So it overtook the Draken due many modernization programs.
Mig-21 vs Mirage IIIe
The MiG-21 is more agile (superior power to weight) but in combat between the two it often came off worse because the Mirage III were piloted by better trained Israeli pilots with better (untypical of Mirage) AAMs. The Mirage had a generally better main radar but both are subject to upgrade in the modern world.
Overall I'd give the fight to to the MiG all factors being equal. Which they never are.
Mirage IIIE vs F8 Crusader
In exercises with our RAAF manned Mirages, USN Crusaders were generally at best the equal of the Mirage, but usually a bit sluggish and certainly not superior in maneuverability except at certain specific altitudes. F-8 were not well equipped with missiles until fitted with Matras, which our Mirages carried as standard. Later the later marks of Crusader were altered to carry a range of different missiles which overtook the performance of our own missiles. Later marks of the crusader were superior to the Mirage, and on board radars and other sensors were always superior
Mig-21 can turn tighter than Lightning, so in a turning fight the "bleed-off" won't matter, as Lightning won't last long enough to make Mig-21's turn rate deteriorate. In a straight-line fight, Lightning accelerates far faster than Mig-21 and has a better rate of climb, so it can engage/disengage at will... until it runs out of fuel.If Lightning initiates, expect 1 or two passes then it runs for home, with Mig-21 probably dying.If Mig-21 initiates, Lightning probably dies before it can accelerate out of danger. Mig-21 probably attacks out of a dive.Interesting "dogfight"... two aircraft primarily designed as bomber-interceptors trying to fight each other.
Mig-21 vs SAAB J35D
In the early years the (older) Draken was the better fighter. Why? Because of its radar, fire control system, weapons and the connection to the swedish air control system. The Draken was aerodynamically the best fighter of its time. The B-Draken was able to attack from the front earlier than the MiG-21.
The F-Draken had a very sophisticated Pulse-Doppler-Radar from Ericsson and a very good fire control system. They fired radar-guided RB27 an heat seeking RB28 missiles, which were improved versions of the AIM-26B and AIM-4D Falcon from Hughes. The (modified) danish Draken were superb attack planes, too.
That all said, the MiG-21 was an important plane for the East Block member states, built in high numbers. So it overtook the Draken due many modernization programs.
Mig-21 vs Mirage IIIe
The MiG-21 is more agile (superior power to weight) but in combat between the two it often came off worse because the Mirage III were piloted by better trained Israeli pilots with better (untypical of Mirage) AAMs. The Mirage had a generally better main radar but both are subject to upgrade in the modern world.
Overall I'd give the fight to to the MiG all factors being equal. Which they never are.
Mirage IIIE vs F8 Crusader
In exercises with our RAAF manned Mirages, USN Crusaders were generally at best the equal of the Mirage, but usually a bit sluggish and certainly not superior in maneuverability except at certain specific altitudes. F-8 were not well equipped with missiles until fitted with Matras, which our Mirages carried as standard. Later the later marks of Crusader were altered to carry a range of different missiles which overtook the performance of our own missiles. Later marks of the crusader were superior to the Mirage, and on board radars and other sensors were always superior
Draken vs Crusader: No brainer. Draken wins hands down. This would only happen in Swedish/Finnish/Danish airspace, as they are not aggressors. Besides being superior aircraft, home court advantage goes to Draken. Their ultimate capabilities were not well known to potential opponents.
Last edited:
Jan - do you mean the first aircraft to lift its wheels off the tarmac/carrier deck?
Glider
Captain
Re the
Mig-21 vs EE Lightning
Mig-21 can turn tighter than Lightning, so in a turning fight the "bleed-off" won't matter, as Lightning won't last long enough to make Mig-21's turn rate deteriorate. In a straight-line fight, Lightning accelerates far faster than Mig-21 and has a better rate of climb, so it can engage/disengage at will... until it runs out of fuel.If Lightning initiates, expect 1 or two passes then it runs for home, with Mig-21 probably dying.If Mig-21 initiates, Lightning probably dies before it can accelerate out of danger. Mig-21 probably attacks out of a dive.Interesting "dogfight"... two aircraft primarily designed as bomber-interceptors trying to fight each other.
I have to say that its my belief that the Lightning would be all over the Mig 21. In acceleration and climb the Lightning has all the advantages and remembering that the F4 did well against the Mig 21 as they fought in the vertical there is no reason to doubt that the Lightning would do at least as well. Which is a thought, an F4 trying to go vertical against the Lightning could come seriously unstuck.
As to agility the Lighting whilst no F16, was a lot better than most people think and at very high speeds could take anyone on being capable of 5 G turns at Mach 2. Also relevant is the radar and fire control system which was a lot better on the Lightning, the AIRPASS radar system was the first HOTAS system and combined to the first true heads up display
Finally the Red Top was probably the best IR missile of the time having a much greater envelope and even a limited head on capability. They were far from perfect but a significant improvement on the ATOLL and early Sidewinders of the time.
Mig-21 vs EE Lightning
Mig-21 can turn tighter than Lightning, so in a turning fight the "bleed-off" won't matter, as Lightning won't last long enough to make Mig-21's turn rate deteriorate. In a straight-line fight, Lightning accelerates far faster than Mig-21 and has a better rate of climb, so it can engage/disengage at will... until it runs out of fuel.If Lightning initiates, expect 1 or two passes then it runs for home, with Mig-21 probably dying.If Mig-21 initiates, Lightning probably dies before it can accelerate out of danger. Mig-21 probably attacks out of a dive.Interesting "dogfight"... two aircraft primarily designed as bomber-interceptors trying to fight each other.
I have to say that its my belief that the Lightning would be all over the Mig 21. In acceleration and climb the Lightning has all the advantages and remembering that the F4 did well against the Mig 21 as they fought in the vertical there is no reason to doubt that the Lightning would do at least as well. Which is a thought, an F4 trying to go vertical against the Lightning could come seriously unstuck.
As to agility the Lighting whilst no F16, was a lot better than most people think and at very high speeds could take anyone on being capable of 5 G turns at Mach 2. Also relevant is the radar and fire control system which was a lot better on the Lightning, the AIRPASS radar system was the first HOTAS system and combined to the first true heads up display
Finally the Red Top was probably the best IR missile of the time having a much greater envelope and even a limited head on capability. They were far from perfect but a significant improvement on the ATOLL and early Sidewinders of the time.
Glider
Captain
I should also add the Lightning was the first fighter to go supersonic without using the afterburner which is worth something in combat and getting the tactical advantage
The unfortunate conclusion for the Lightning F.3 to this requirement is that it would lose hands down, as the F.3 was armed only with AAMs; no guns.
Glider
Captain
But all the other versions carried cannon and the F3a and F6 had the Red Tops as well so why pick on the F3?
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
