Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
No, their IFF circuitry mimicked ours because they were so far behind us in that technology it was easier to steal it through espionage than to develop their own version.So their IFF circuitry mimicked ours because they were monitoring them, and relaying them to their interceptors?
Ground stations, mostly I would guess, as they weren't particularly well supplied with aircraft or ships.What kind of SIGINT were they using?
I have a hard time imagining an F4 with pylons and ejector racks sustaining 7 Gs without bleeding energy, even with no ordnance hanging. It's all about L/D at high alpha, and those ejector racks are draggy beasts.Those figures seem to have been reported over the years.
What the heck is a GE-19? Is that a typo for GE J79, the Starfighter's actual engine, an earlier version of the F4's and RA5C's engines?The F-104G's with the GE-19's
I always thought the Vietnam F-8 looked like it was going 1000 just sitting on the ramp. But the F8U-III, pretty ugly. No, really ugly. Must have scared the ground away.Your not kiddin. I knew about the F8 of course but not that version. I actually kinda like the looks of the f8 so I thought how bad could this experimental version be so I headed off to Wiki to get a peak.........well I got my answer....... it really is that bad. Ouch!!
No, made the sea want to rise up and smite it!Must have scared the ground away.
Which proves one thing, he never flew the Lighting.Many years ago (early '80s) I was talking with Oberstleutnant Lothar S., that was then the deputy Commander of the Luftwaffe detachment at Decimomannu AFB and had been previously the Chief test Pilot of the MRCA-Tormado program. The rest of his qualifications could be easily imagined, as He flew with anything from F-84 to F-15, and from G-91 to F-4.
Son of Art, as his Father was in the Nachtjagt.
"What has been the plane you loved best, Lothar?" I asked.
He didn't even let me finish the question.
"But F-104, of course."
Which proves one thing, he never flew the Lighting.
Full marks for imagination, not a lot for accuracy
I voted fpr the F15 all round but just wanted to add, the Electric Lightning for it's particular nitch at it's particular time was really excellent imho and gets points for imaginative/ thinking outside the box design as well.
Well for versatility you just can't beat a Phantom in my opinion. Can't really think of anything that plane couldn't do at least reasonably well.It's a funny thing about the sobriquet of "greatest". It's not hard to imagine the Lighting as the greatest point defense interceptor. Greatest fighter? A great argument could be made for the MiG-21. I guess it all boils down to what could you strap on the airplane and expect it to do fairly well outside its' original design parameters as well as the original designed mission.
So even as a now ancient F-14 8345/6415 guy, I'd have to look pretty hard at the F-4/F-15/F-16, having said that, please let me know what other aircraft you feel were as efficiently versatile.
The F-18? No legs.
I voted fpr the F15 all round but just wanted to add, the Electric Lightning for it's particular nitch at it's particular time was really excellent imho and gets points for imaginative/ thinking outside the box design as well.
Well, you have to add points due to the simple fact that it could repeatedly trap onboard a CV.Well for versatility you just can't beat a Phantom in my opinion. Can't really think of anything that plane couldn't do at least reasonably well.
Must admit I'm not 100% sure what trap means in this context. I'm guessing it means to "operate" off a carrier(cv).It's a funny thing about the sobriquet of "greatest". It's not hard to imagine the Lighting as the greatest interceptor. Greatest fighter?
Well, you have to add points due to the simple fact that it could repeatedly trap onboard a CV.
I voted fpr the F15 all round but just wanted to add, the Electric Lightning for it's particular nitch at it's particular time was really excellent imho and gets points for imaginative/ thinking outside the box design as well.
Must admit I'm not 100% sure what trap means in this context. I'm guessing it means to "operate" off a carrier(cv).
And yes, this is good for alot of versatility points imho.
Let's not forget, it was your F-14 that eventually replaced the F-4 as the Navy's main fighter.It's a funny thing about the sobriquet of "greatest". It's not hard to imagine the Lighting as the greatest point defense interceptor. Greatest fighter? A great argument could be made for the MiG-21. I guess it all boils down to what could you strap on the airplane and expect it to do fairly well outside its' original design parameters as well as the original designed mission.
So even as a now ancient F-14 8345/6415 guy, I'd have to look pretty hard at the F-4/F-15/F-16, having said that, please let me know what other aircraft you feel were as efficiently versatile.
The F-18? No legs.
Maintenance man hours/flight hour, especially as the airframes began to age. That's what's not to love.Flew faster, flew farther, carried a greater payload, piloted by Tom Cruise in the movies, what's not to love?!
Trap: To be grabbed by a wire attached to a 70,000 ton ship when your 45,000 pound jet is in full burner and trying to get airborne again. The old timers used to tell me the term originated in the days of straight deck carriers when bolters were not possible, so if you missed all 13 wires, the elastic barrier "trapped" you. Every touch down resulted in a full stop landing, one way or another.Trap does indeed mean land onboard a carrier.
Say what you will, it still REPLACED the F-4.Maintenance man hours/flight hour, especially as the airframes began to age. That's what's not to love.
Now Iran is the only member of the Tomcat Club. It priced itself out of the market for us. That's why it comes after the F4, Mig21, F86, Hawker Hunter, F16 and F15 in my lineup. Versatility, performance, and longevity are what count in my book.
Cheers,
Wes
True enough, but when the bad gets so bad you can't afford it, you lose the good as well. And then there's the hidden factor. As long as we operated and supported Tomcats, the black market supply of parts and support to Iran couldn't be stopped. Somehow that became more important than the additional marginal utility of the F14 fleet.Say what you will, it still REPLACED the F-4.
It's neve perfect. There's always some bad with the good.
Elvis