FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
On the 17, knock off about 1000kg. Loaded 5,324kg, fully loaded 6,286 kg.
The best fighter of the 1950's.
- Thread starter Soren
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
On the 17, knock off about 1000kg. Loaded 5,324kg, fully loaded 6,286 kg.
- Thread starter
- #142
- Thread starter
- #143
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Ok
Well the Lightning with a third more power to weight ratio and the MiG-17 with 114kg less wing loading - interesting.
A properly trained Lightning pilot should best the MiG from medium distances, I would still avoid a turning fight.
- Thread starter
- #145
I wouldn't be scared of a turnfight with a MIG-17 if I was in a Lightning, and for three reasons primarily:
1. I know I can power through the tightest of turns
2. If it turns out that the MIG-17 can turn slightly better than me in a plain horizontal turnfight, well then I simply point my nose up abit and force the fight into a climbing turnfight.
3. I know that if he even as much as starts to gain an advantage on me in a turnfight I can either simply point my a/c directly up into the sun and climb away effortlessly or level out and speed out of there in no time.
But I am quite convinced that because of the Lightnings huge advantage in T/W ratio it will outturn the MIG-17 at any speed. Esp. the later Lightning F.6 should be able to outturn the MIG.
1. I know I can power through the tightest of turns
2. If it turns out that the MIG-17 can turn slightly better than me in a plain horizontal turnfight, well then I simply point my nose up abit and force the fight into a climbing turnfight.
3. I know that if he even as much as starts to gain an advantage on me in a turnfight I can either simply point my a/c directly up into the sun and climb away effortlessly or level out and speed out of there in no time.
But I am quite convinced that because of the Lightnings huge advantage in T/W ratio it will outturn the MIG-17 at any speed. Esp. the later Lightning F.6 should be able to outturn the MIG.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
I could agree with the first two to a point - I don't think the third item will come into play because things are going to happen so quickly you probably won't have time to think about that and if he's already on you're tail, you're dead.
I did jet combat simulations in lumpy T-33s, L-29s and 39s and things happen very quickly in those slugs, I could only imagine how much quicker a visual dogfight would be in a 17 vs, Lightening.
The F.6 was introduced in the late 60s if we put this in a Vietnam perspective. I think the MiG-17 might hold its own against the earlier heavier Lightning in a turning contest.
For me, I wouldn't take the chance - I'd exploit the full advantage of my aircraft and stay in the vertical.
parsifal
Colonel
Wouldnt it be better for the Lightning to exploit its missile fitout, to which the Mig has no answer at all ???? How efficient were the Red Top missiles carried by the Lightning???
Glider
Captain
Very efficient, just very expensive
I think it does Bill, based on the fact that numerous new variants were produced and flown throughout the Fifties, including the CA-27, whereas the Lightning to me is more of a sixties aircraft. Until very late in the decade the "Lightning" was the "big mouth" P.1A/B, which demonstrated a number of problems.
But that's just my opinion.
This is Gunston's list from "Fighters of the Fifties" which includes prototypes and projects.
He has very high praise for the Avro CF-100 (and the Arrow
), Hunter and the Vought XF8U-3 Crusader - "By far the best fighter we (the US) ever cancelled".
In my opinion the Mig-21F-13 was a quit good 50's fighter. Fast agile good climb cannon and rocket armed. Less radar, but with radar range finder coupled to gyro gun sight. Pilots how flow it called it "sports car". Even ten years later in Vietnam a challenging dogfighter…..
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
But it could only stay in the air for a half hour! Although formidable in Vietnam, they still were pretty much mauled.
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
And with only 20+ of them in the inventory, they sure as h*ll couldn't afford to lose them....
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Depending who you talk to during operation Bolo, the NVNAF lost 2/3rds of their MiG-21s, 7 of them. There would have been more if the F-4s had a gun or had more reliable Sparrow Missiles. I believe at least 4 of them were duds during the engagement.
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
The Mig -21 was very small, about the size of an F-5, so adaptability was limited. I also think it was somewhat limited at low level by the delta wing.
Light and powerful typically makes a good dogfighter, but for the broader terms of fighter, it was limited.
Light and powerful typically makes a good dogfighter, but for the broader terms of fighter, it was limited.
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
True! They really got their *rse whipped that day thanks to the late Mr Olds! 
- Thread starter
- #156
- Thread starter
- #157
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
At the same load (4038 lbs) as what generated the 1.02 T/W of the lightning, I get .86 of for the F-106 (loaded weight of 28458 lbs).
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
I knew a B-58 pilot who, if I remember correctly, stated that the only aircraft he encountered that could run an intercept on the B-58 was the F-106.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
My father in law ran the last operational F-106 squadron in the USAF. These were the chase planes used on the B-1B program. He said he also had a chance to fly dissimilar air combat simulations against F-15s, and depending on the pilot and scenario, sometimes the -106 would come out on top.
He said it lost a lot of energy in turns and didn't accelerate fast, but would continue to accelerate to the point where it would self destruct, one of the fastest aircraft he flew.
This is him in his aircraft
