The best fighter of the 1950's.

The best fighter of the 1950's

  • Supermarine Scimitar

    Votes: 1 0.8%

  • Hawker Hunter

    Votes: 7 5.7%

  • MIG-19

    Votes: 5 4.1%

  • F-105 Thunderchief

    Votes: 6 4.9%

  • English Electric Lighting

    Votes: 11 8.9%

  • F-100 Super Sabre

    Votes: 9 7.3%

  • Dassault Super Mystère

    Votes: 2 1.6%

  • MIG-21

    Votes: 26 21.1%

  • F-86 Sabre

    Votes: 18 14.6%

  • F-8 Crusader

    Votes: 21 17.1%

  • F-106 Delta Dart

    Votes: 8 6.5%

  • F-102 Delta Dagger

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • F-104 Starfighter

    Votes: 9 7.3%
  • Total voters
    123

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

That problem is that 'opinions' are just that = opinions. They're pretty worthless without supportive facts.

As you know turn performance is not all about wing loading, its just as much about the thrust to weight ratio, and the Lightning actually has the advantage in both areas over the F-5A/B/E.

The F-5 was compared to the MIG-21 in terms of flying characteristics, one of the reasons it was used as a mock up enemy a/c at top gun for so long. And the MIG-21 was known for its high roll rate, climb rate and speed, not its turn performance.

Also the mentioning that the Lightning lacked the air-to-air capability of newer fighters doesn't relate to its maneuverability as far as I can tell, just the fact that its' radar and avionics were outdated.
 
Points taken but I would like to compare both aircraft, 450 knots in an operational configuration. "D" was one of two people I've heard this from and he being a Lightning fanatic would seem like a reliable source since he had a direct source to Lightning operations.

Wiki tells us the Lightning has a wing loading of 87.9 lb/ft², I show 132.44 lb. per Sq. ft for the F-5E.
 
The F-5 might be able to turn tighter at 450knts, but why is the Lightning going to be fighting in that regime? If you're limited to that speed you may as well have a Follant Gnat and fly rings around the F-5 again. Given the large amount of thrust and excellent accelration, even if you bleed off a lot of speed in a tight turn, you're soon flying fast again.

The air to air capability came from the inability to mount newer weapons and the newer weapons being cancelled. The dish diameter was fairly small which limited the range of the radar. However, the radar guided missiles were all cancelled at various stages leaving only Firestreak and Red Top IR missiles. The problem comes with the cancellation of the generation after the Lighting around 1960. Large aircraft for M2.5+ with longer range and various new missiles. The most likely to be built was the Fairey "Delta III" which was a large delta. Climb to 75000ft in 1.5minutes with reheat. Because of the aluminium construction max speed is limited to M2.27 but M1.9 is possible without reheat. It was later planned to use stainless steel construction for M3.0. Much larger fuselage for a larger radar dish and either Red Top, Red Dean or Red Hebe missiles. Not really air superiority fighters. With the cancellation of that generation, attention turned to VG and VTOL aircraft, which were in turn cancelled apart from the Harrier. The more advanced missiles were also cancelled so Red Top remained.
 
red admiral said:
The F-5 might be able to turn tighter at 450knts, but why is the Lightning going to be fighting in that regime?
Click to expand...
Point taken, but if it found itself in Vietnam(as we started discussing) it might have been brought down to that speed to engage the MiG-17

Soren said:
You sure he was talking about maneuverability then FLYBOYJ, and not just refering to the fact the F-5 features more modern avionics, weapons outfit radar ?
Click to expand...
Perhaps it was "all the above." Radar, pilot skill and just finding a right spot where the F-5 could exploit the Lightning.
 
Btw, the normal weight of the Lightning is from would I can gather around 15,500 kg. 18,900 kg is with maximum load out.

So the combat wing loading of the Electric Lightning is a respectable 351.4 kg/m^2. The F-5E on the other hand has a wing loading of over 500 kg/m^2.
 
FLYBOYJ said:
Perhaps it was "all the above." Radar, pilot skill and just finding a right spot where the F-5 could exploit the Lightning.
Click to expand...

Roger that, cause according to all the data we have the Lightning was indeed one of the best turn fighters out there and should outturn the F-5E at all speeds.
 
So all in all I've got to agree with Bill, the Lightning would've been an ideal a/c for the USAF during the Vietnam war. But the US also had a good fighter in the F-8 Crusader, which unfortunately didn't get the role it deserved during nam.
 
Soren said:
So all in all I've got to agree with Bill, the Lightning would've been an ideal a/c for the USAF during the Vietnam war. But the US also had a good fighter in the F-8 Crusader, which unfortunately didn't get the role it deserved during nam.
Click to expand...

Actually, while the MiG 17 was the prime air weapon I would have gone back to late model F-86's (F-86K) - but I agree the Crusader..and the range was insufficient for F-86
 
There is no doubt that the Lightning became outdated and that its electronincs which were not seriously updated held it back. However it would be wrong to believe that when it entered service that the electronincs were behind its contemparies.
The Lightning had a number of firsts in this area, it had the Red Top missile which had a much greater operational aspect than most and was sometimes described as a limited all aspect missile. In truth the head on only worked aganst a high flying aircraft which was going at sufficient speed to warm up the airframe.
I think (and am happy to be corrected on this) that the radar was the first that could automatically track more than one target at a time.
As for its agility the climb and acceleration speak for itself and whilst it had a good roll rate its actual turn was not shall we say its strength.

One last point they could and often were fitted with a fixed air to air refuelling probe that was on the port side of the aircraft.
 
Agree folks.

I always wondered how things work have worked out sending in F-8s to take care of the MiG-21 and having F-86Ks to take on the MiG-17s.
 
Yeah that would've ruined his day no doubt. The MIG's were also lucky that his belt snapped later.
 
I agree with Soren (and others) about the Lightning and its turn capability. To say that the Lightning was not a turning fighter is just plain wrong. If I could only find the exact quote from Beau's book that I mentioned earlier in the thread I could put it up here but the words of a USAF test pilot with experience of all then current types leave me in no doubt that the Lightning was phenominally manouverable and in fact, turning, as well as acceleration and climb, numbereed among its greatest strengths.

One reason put forward for this, which I have not seen mentioned here yet, was that in addition to the high thrust and low frontal area the Lightning enjoyed, there was also the Lightnings unique wing design which benefitted from the highly swept leading edge acting in a similar way to the LERX of later types, the perpendicular hinge line of its 'tip' ailerons which gave a positive and rapid response, but it also lacked the inherent drag of a delta such as the Mirage/F-106, the wing resembling, as it does, a delta with the inboard trailing section removed. Later models benfitted from even better manouverability thanks to the 'cranked and drooped' leading edge mod to the F-2A and F-6. It was also these models which had the larger ventral CFT (with the guns and ammo in the front half of it) plumbing for overwing ferry tanks and the wing mounted IFR probe.





I'm not an aerodynamiscist myself so I can't furnish graphs and formulae on this but thats how the Lightnings high agility is explained in all the reference works I have read on it from the likes of Beau, Charles Gardner, etc
 
I read the report by the USAF pilot you mention and he did give accolades to the Lightning's turning abilities. I've seen others mention that its turning ability wasn't its greatest strength but considering its size, it turned well.

Going back to the original point here, could it turn with a MiG-17?

Wiki tells us the Lightning has a wing loading of 429 kg/m2, the MiG-17 237 kg/m²
 

Just to be fair the actual combat weight of the Lightning was around 14,500 to 15,500 kg, so the wing loading was only 328 kg/m^2 to 351 kg/m^2.

So for comparison..

Lightning:
Wingloading = 328 kg/m^2 to 351 kg/m^2
T/W ratio = 0.96 to 1.02

MIG-17:
Wingloading = 237 kg/m^2
T/W ratio = 0.63


From the above data my best educated guess is that they would be very close in turn performance at low speeds, the MIG-17 benefitting from its low wing-loading while the Lightning simply powers through any turn with brute force. But this assuming a fight in the horizontal plane. A fight in the vertical with looping turns the Lightning will quite effortlessly win.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Second best fighter of World War II
Replies
15
Views
2K
SaparotRob
A
Best British single engined radial aircraft in WW2?
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
Shortround6
S
  • Poll
Best Biplane fighter ww2
Replies
1
Views
4K
wlewisiii
  • Poll
German multiengine jet bomber best immune to Allied interception
Replies
0
Views
924
Vahe Demirjian
  • Poll
Best US escort fighter in ETO during 1943?
3 4 5
Replies
90
Views
13K
DarrenW
Menu
Log in
Register