The Greatest Fighter Jet of All Time.

Which is the Best?

  • Total voters
    281

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

Sys, I have no doubt of that. There is a lot more to this than meets the eye and if I can understand his reasoning I will try to post it. He flew the F8 operationally in VN and commanded at Fighter Town. He also became carrier qualified in the F14 at the age of fifty, so he knows a lot about ACM and fighters and fighter bombers and I am sure he is not prejudiced
 

An old one I'm just catching up to...

Sorry but from I'm seeing on this chart, you're still way aft and does not indicate if the centerline tank is attached - maybe it's indicated in the text, most of us don't read Cyrillic.

The chart is showing that the aircraft can wind up in a configuration that places it close to its max MAC. As stated, the aircraft is tricky to fly as it is, do you think this situation is endearing to low time pilots? 32% of MAC where 33% is the max limit, landing at over 160 mph?!?

I briefly worked on a civilian MiG-21 and during its first test flight after the aircraft was re-assembeled here in the states, the test pilot (who was Russian) wanted to make sure that his GC was kept as far fwd during the initial test flight.
 
Last edited:
Tricky one. Mind if I join in please?

I have always thought the English Electric Lightning was a pretty awesome piece of British engineering. First aircraft capable of supercruise.

I do like the Harrier, as I have had the privilege to sit in, work on and act as ground crew for an active RAF GR9.

Finally I will agree that the F-4 is one brilliant piece of kit. I'd say the F-4K is the coolest (the Fleet Air Arm version). I reckon you should include the Blackburn Buccaneer, one of the best low-level strike jets ever!

Andy
 
The original design of the MiG-21 was excellent and certainly up there with the best.

Not its fault the design was rolled on well past its sell by date and certainly never designed to take on Fighters which didnt exist when it first flew.

If you look at the earlier MiG-15/17/19 then the Fishbed would have been replaced in short order but it never was until the MiG-29 or in some cases never replaced at all.
 
Me again. I've gone with the Lightning because of what I've said before, plus I love the idea of an aircraft that is properly fast with two socking great Rolls-Royce Avons behind you. I know it was useless at turning though but hey, nothing is perfect. Running a close second would be the F-4 Phantom II. I guess many of you have seen the TV series 'Dogfights' on the Discovery channel?
 
What fun! Thank you for allowing me to participate!

I voted for the F-22 Raptor. I love the Phantom II and F-86, and I respect the Eagle and even the Fulcrum...and, I'd love to fly the BAC Lightning (didn't there used to be one in Capetown you get fly?), but when a jet can't even be seen and shot down by F-15s, it's the best, ever.

Of course, I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for the Thud (my Dad worked on them at Korat), but it wasn't the best fighter out there.

=Troy
 
There are a great many technological advances in the Raptor, but I think it might be a bit premature to call it the best fighter jet of all time. There are a lot of other fighters that have proven their value over time and under fire.
 
Tangopilot89, You have more reason to like the Lightning than you know

It was far from useless at turning, it was the most manouverable of all supersonic fighters until the teen series F-15 and F-16 appeared in service due to its unique configuration.

The book 'Testing Early Jets' by Roland Beamont offers an insight into this with a report by a USAF test pilot who declared how he loved the Lightning on account of its being 'as fast as an F-106 but turns like an F-86!'

Having said that Id probably go with the F-15.

(hello again boys )
 
I vote
F22 because of technology
F4 versatility and length of service
F86 for good looks
EE Lightning for mean looks and a helluva show on take off

special mention for the harrier that can make a kill then take a bow before landing, thankfully its main forte was never used, the russians didnt come over the wall and trash our runways.
 
Can't figure out how the EE Lightning rates over the 104, only a couple of Air Forces opted for Lightning over the many that chose the 104. The 104 was easier to maintain and more adaptable
 
The Lightning had a number of advantages over the 104, performance, fleibility, radar, weapon systems, but I expect the main factors over the purchase for the politico's were:-

1 - Timing, The Lightning wasn't available when the decisions were undertaken

2 - Cost, I don't know the costs but the 104 must have been a hell of a lot cheaper

3 - Shall we say somewhat dodgy sale practices?
 
I disagree with flexibility the 104 was employed as interceptor, recce , interdiction, ground attack and maritime strike. . Yes the Lightning was a little faster but not all that much.
 
pbfoot said:
I disagree with flexibility the 104 was employed as interceptor, recce , interdiction, ground attack and maritime strike. . Yes the Lightning was a little faster but not all that much.
Click to expand...

Fair points however I would certainly prefer the Lightning as an interceptor. Its rate of climb, radar, acceleration, missiles and speed were better than the F104 and it was also the first fighter to have supersonic cruise. The often quoted example of the interception of a Concorde would confirm that statement, here the Lightning manged to intercept Concorde whereas the F104, Mirages, F16, F14 and F15 all failed. It was known under exceptional circumstances to intercept U2's during exercises whch must have given someone a shock.

At a practical level the F104 when kitted out for combat which is what really counts had all sorts of drop tanks, ECM pods and missiles/bombs hanging underneath it which must have hurt its performance. The Lightning from the F3 onwards normally only used the external tanks for transfers and often relied on internal ECM.

The RAF didn't use the Lightning for GA, sea strike or Recce, after all they have a number of other types for those missions, but the aircraft could be used in these roles and the ones purchased by Saudi Arabia were equipped for these roles( with the exception of sea strike). The GA role had the same issues as the F104 so no advantage there but the recce equipment was internal giving it a performance advantage.
 
The Lightning didn't need "exceptional circumstances" to reach the U2. I once worked with a member of the first Squadron to get the F.I version, and he told how there were always three a/c on QRA, but only two would take off, until one day, when all three went. In the evening, the C.O. appeared with a large photo, and said,"Here you are, lads, this is what you've been waiting for."
Prior to the arrival of the Lightnings, the Squadron's Javelins had taken off, to intercept, but had had to "fire" from below, before they fell away, out of control. The photo was of a U2, with a Lightning on each wingtip, photographed, from above, by the third. He said that he always wanted a copy of that photo, but it vanished from sight, never to be seen again.
Edgar
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

New Chinese Fighter
Replies
1
Views
465
Capt. Vick
F-4 Phantom II - McDonnell Douglas Supersonic Jet Interceptor And Fighter Bomber
Replies
11
Views
1K
Gnomey
M
The Wrath of KAAN?
Replies
3
Views
890
Snautzer01
M
The USAF V-22 Mishap of 2023
Replies
2
Views
535
Thumpalumpacus
M
Launch the Alert Fighters ....And Grab the Xbox Controller
Replies
1
Views
312
Denniss
D
Menu
Log in
Register