The Greatest Fighter Jet of All Time.

[Lighthunmust]

Your post indicated it was a reply to two people and that was the 2 previous posts that enquired on your Sabre being waxed by a Trainer
What trainer was this I might see a T38 getting a bounce but what else

A Sabre getting waxed by an armed T38 Talon trainer, essentially/equivalently a F5 fighter, would not be something to feel humiliation about. The Talon's on paper performance is superior. The semantics of the words "essentially" and "equivalent" provide flexibility in description. The Sabre was waxed by a supposedly inferior opponent that is more well known for being a trainer, Charlie Sheen prop, and air show performer than as a famous, ferocious fighter like the F-86. The mere fact that none of the posters to this thread immediately realized what aircraft I was referring too is evidence of the truth of the preceding statement. An insect of an aircraft known as "The Sabre Slayer" has a better kill ratio against Sabres than the Saber has against it. It is also a product of British aeronautical genius. Designed by the same guy who designed the Lightning. By the way, on my list of "favorite" jet fighters, the F-86 Sabre is first among equals. As I rhetorically stated earlier "Why do you make me choose one among the many I love?".

Hello Neil, Interceptors are supposed to be short range protectors. The Lightning was a faster Spitfire in that respect. It was designed to protect her homeland, not some vast continent like yours. Horses for courses mon brave.
Cheers
John

Hi Neil, I think John has got you there. The short-legged Lightning certainly did a better job protecting its homeland than the long-legged Arrow or rapidly obsolete Bomarcs did yours. By the way, I like the Dan Ackroid (?) movie on the Arrow. Much like the F-14/F-18 SH controversy, politics triumphed over on paper performance. What a shame.

 

[The Basket]

If the Lightning was short legged then the Gnat was out a fuel taxying to the runway.

The Gnat wasnt a designed trainer....it was a gunfighter from the start. Probably the best gunfighter of the subsonic class.

 

[Lighthunmust]

The Gnat wasnt a designed trainer....it was a gunfighter from the start. Probably the best gunfighter of the subsonic class.

Absolutely correct; it was not "designed" a trainer. As designed, as used, and as thought of, are frequently blended into various shades of gray depending on individual perception. My perception is that it was essentially/equivalently an armed trainer by the time of its Sabre Slayer days.

You might want to put on your armor, I can hear the Sabres rattling their sheaths as they are getting ready to be drawn to dispute your second sentence.

 

[pbfoot]

If the Lightning was short legged then the Gnat was out a fuel taxying to the runway.

The Gnat wasnt a designed trainer....it was a gunfighter from the start. Probably the best gunfighter of the subsonic class.

I wonder how many air to air refuellings if it had that capacity did it need to cross Atlantic, the CF5 needed about 7-8 and would think the Lightning would be about the same

 

[FLYBOYJ]

A Sabre getting waxed by an armed T38 Talon trainer, essentially/equivalently a F5 fighter, would not be something to feel humiliation about. The Talon's on paper performance is superior. The semantics of the words "essentially" and "equivalent" provide flexibility in description. The Sabre was waxed by a supposedly inferior opponent that is more well known for being a trainer, Charlie Sheen prop, and air show performer than as a famous, ferocious fighter like the F-86. The mere fact that none of the posters to this thread immediately realized what aircraft I was referring too is evidence of the truth of the preceding statement. An insect of an aircraft known as "The Sabre Slayer" has a better kill ratio against Sabres than the Saber has against it. It is also a product of British aeronautical genius. Designed by the same guy who designed the Lightning. By the way, on my list of "favorite" jet fighters, the F-86 Sabre is first among equals. As I rhetorically stated earlier "Why do you make me choose one among the many I love?".

OK, are you referring to the Gnat? Come out and say it instead of dancing in circles.

The Gnat "Claimed" 7 F-86s during the India/ Pakistan wars. In more likelihood they took down 3 or 4. On the other end at least 2 IAF Gnats were destroyed by the PAF (from memory, I could probably find times and dates). Their encounters were few and this really doesn't show true superiority over the Saber. On the other hand the later consistently brought down MiG-21s and SU-7s, so tell me does this really justify your claims?????

And please, don't patronize us with rhetoric, again, just come out and speak your mind....

 

[Readie]

7-Year Old Boy Wins, Then Loses a Harrier Jet on eBay | Geek.com


An opportunity of a lifetime.
I bet his Dad's face was a picture...

 

[CharlesBronson]

7-Year Old Boy Wins, Then Loses a Harrier Jet on eBay | Geek.com


An opportunity of a lifetime.
I bet his Dad's face was a picture...

Haha, let the kid have it

 

[steve51]

Trying to determine what really happened during air combat between Pakistan and India is frustrating. For what its worth, India has admitted that 2 Gnats were lost to F86s and Pakistan has admitted that 3 F86s were lost to Gnats during the 65 war. The Gnat was very hard to see due to its small size and outclimbed the F86, but it is an exaggeration to imply that the Gnat dominated the F86, IMO.

 

[Lighthunmust]

Trying to determine what really happened during air combat between Pakistan and India is frustrating. For what its worth, India has admitted that 2 Gnats were lost to F86s and Pakistan has admitted that 3 F86s were lost to Gnats during the 65 war. The Gnat was very hard to see due to its small size and outclimbed the F86, but it is an exaggeration to imply that the Gnat dominated the F86, IMO.

Temporarily pulling my tongue out of cheek (the norm being the opposite in this thread) I agree "dominated" is not an accurate descriptive term, nor one I used to describe Gnat and Saber interaction in 1965 or 1971. However, I think it is often more illuminating to discuss an issue indirectly by orbiting around the edges than with blunt, say it as you see it, straight talking, linear discussion. A broader, deeper, and lasting understanding of a complex issue and a change of outlook and approach to other unrelated issues often is the valuable end result. With the limited information with have, taking into consideration the disputed claims of victory, and your statistics; the consensus is the Gnat was more of a Sabre Slayer than the Sabre was a Gnat Swatter.

Repositioning of tongue back into cheek will commence in 5,4,3,...

 

[Readie]

Back to the real world ( briefly)
British Aerospace Sea Harrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Our Harrier is one of the most successful jet age warriors.
Tried, tested, proven almost unbeaten
Cheers
John

 

[FLYBOYJ]

the consensus is the Gnat was more of a Sabre Slayer than the Sabre was a Gnat Swatter.

Repositioning of tongue back into cheek will commence in 5,4,3,...

So tell us WHO the consensus is??? I think you're possibly the only one who has come up with this. I mean, didn't you initially say and I quote "The F-86 Sabre's reputation suffers from the eternal humiliation of getting waxed so frequently by what is essentially an armed trainer." I don't see these numbers as either "frequent" or humbling, so I guess this is possibly you're own baseless opinion?!?!?

Perhaps teeth should clench around tongue immediately!

 

[Matt308]

I'm questioning which cheek.

 

[Readie]

I'm wondering if this thread question could be neatly divided into those jets that actually fought real battles and those that did not.
For example the Lightning never actually saw war but, the Harrier did.
It would be easier to run a list of proven warriors and a list of those that acted as a deterrent.
What do you think?
Cheers
John

 

[Lighthunmust]

In my opinion, it is incredible that anyone would dispute what the Gnat did to the Saber was anything other than humiliating and ignominious. There are so many sources in print and on the internet (including some from Pakistan) that support this conclusion it should be self-evident to anyone taking the time to read them. Even the lowest acknowledged victory to loss statistics indicate the Gnat triumphed over the Sabre 2 to 1. The ignominy is not just from the fact that the Gnat was considered technically inferior to the Sabre, the Sabres had American Sidewinder AAMs, and the IAF was considered to be qualitatively inferior to the PAF in almost all areas. It was not just a one time fluke either. Gnats waxed Sabres in multiple engagements in two different conflicts separated by 6 years. Six years that the PAF had to develop countermeasures to combat the Gnat and apparently failed to do so. In my opinion, anyone denying that what the Sabre suffered from the Gnat was not in terms of human emotion humiliating and ignominious is either uneducated about the topic, willfully ignorant about the topic, or emotionally biased toward the Sabre, and therefore has an opinion I consider to be not worth further serious consideration.

By the way Matt, it is the right upper and no I am not standing on my head.

 

[Lighthunmust]

I'm wondering if this thread question could be neatly divided into those jets that actually fought real battles and those that did not.
For example the Lightning never actually saw war but, the Harrier did.
It would be easier to run a list of proven warriors and a list of those that acted as a deterrent.
What do you think?
Cheers
John

This is an excellent idea for a better poll. The current one is rather poorly designed and silly, and certainly nothing to get worked up about. We should all remember the immortal words "Lighten up, Francis!"

 

[Readie]

the immortal words "Lighten up, Francis!"

I had to look that up...I always thought the phrase was something to do with Francis George Cluster and the battle of 'biglittle horn'
Anyway, as its an American turn of phrase I found this to assist the process and my (hopeful) understanding Lighten Up!
The London English are more likely to say 'strike a light' as an expression of astonishment.
Now, if you 'strike a light' do you in actual fact 'lighten up'?
Cheers
John

 

[FLYBOYJ]

In my opinion, it is incredible that anyone would dispute what the Gnat did to the Saber was anything other than humiliating and ignominious. There are so many sources in print and on the internet (including some from Pakistan) that support this conclusion it should be self-evident to anyone taking the time to read them. Even the lowest acknowledged victory to loss statistics indicate the Gnat triumphed over the Sabre 2 to 1. The ignominy is not just from the fact that the Gnat was considered technically inferior to the Sabre, the Sabres had American Sidewinder AAMs, and the IAF was considered to be qualitatively inferior to the PAF in almost all areas. It was not just a one time fluke either. Gnats waxed Sabres in multiple engagements in two different conflicts separated by 6 years. Six years that the PAF had to develop countermeasures to combat the Gnat and apparently failed to do so. In my opinion, anyone denying that what the Sabre suffered from the Gnat was not in terms of human emotion humiliating and ignominious is either uneducated about the topic, willfully ignorant about the topic, or emotionally biased toward the Sabre, and therefore has an opinion I consider to be not worth further serious consideration.

By the way Matt, it is the right upper and no I am not standing on my head.

Then provide us with the S-P-E-C-I-F-I-C combat data to back up your claims instead of spewing long winded nonsense that is starting to resemble either severe back peddling or large amounts of defecation found in fields occupied by large animals with horns emerging from their heads...

Funny though - it seems some of your "opinions" were taken verbatim from this site, again citing "claims" vs "confirmed kills" something that perhaps you don't have a full grasp of.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Folland_Gnat

The Gnat is a great little aircraft and did lump the F-86 in the "FEW" and I'll repeat "FEW" encounters it had with it, but to serve it up as a "Saber Slayer" is a little far fetched, perhaps even delusional unless you enjoy reading propaganda from the IAF!

 

[The Basket]

Not sure why the Gnat beating the Sabre is a humiliation. Strong words.

I would certainly place the MiG-17 above the Sabre though.

My current favourite is the Mirage III. That is a warplane with combat history.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Not sure why the Gnat beating the Sabre is a humiliation. Strong words.

I would certainly place the MiG-17 above the Sabre though.

My current favourite is the Mirage III. That is a warplane with combat history.

Agree. Mirage III a great aircraft, not my fav but an aircraft with combat history.

I guess Some folks don't have the gumption to consider pilot ability, "who sees who first" be it by visual or radar intercept. The F-86 smoked MiG-21 on several occasions over the same airspace, to say the MiG-21 was "humiliated" or calling the F-86 a MiG-21 dominator in those encounters is stretching it, especially if pilot ability is left out of the equation.

I'd put last model F-86s up against the MiG-17 though.

 

[Lighthunmust]

Plagiarism is a serious accusation that when wrong at the very least makes the accuser appear very foolish. This is especially true when analysis of a such a short document shows no verbatim transcription. Many sources of information, internet and book, make use of words I have written to describe the Gnat in this thread. My own analysis of information from multiple sources and media resulted in the phrasing of my opinion regarding the Sabre's humiliation and ignominy caused by the Gnat.