RichardSuhkoi
Airman 1st Class
- 171
- Apr 27, 2021
Until the S model with blown flaps that solved high AOA and improved turning.
But it came too late.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Until the S model with blown flaps that solved high AOA and improved turning.If you are going to include Helicopters then I would include two
The Huey and the Sea King, both of which were licenced to other countries and served more of less everywhere.
F104 I wouldn't include. Yes it served in Nato but only very limited penetration elsewhere, I also don't believe it better than the opposition (in a military or commercial manner) and it also lacked reliability.
The S model had a significant number of issues, in particular whilst it could carry the twin Sparrow it couldn't carry the cannon as well. The turn was improved but it was still well below the opposition.Until the S model with blown flaps that solved high AOA and improved turning.
But it came too late.
I didn't know it had to lose the cannon.The S model had a significant number of issues, in particular whilst it could carry the twin Sparrow it couldn't carry the cannon as well. The turn was improved but it was still well below the opposition.
However my main point was that outside Europe it's use was very limited.
There were a number of different versions of both aircraft but taking the two main versions The Mig21bis and the F104G in most instances the Mig 21 had the advantage.I didn't know it had to lose the cannon.
But say we compare the 104S to a Mig 21 (its bomber interceptor peer). From memory I think it could out climb,
Out pace, and reasonably dog fight.
I think the Mig-21 only had a radar that transmitted to the ground.
If you are going to include Helicopters then I would include two
The Huey and the Sea King, both of which were licenced to other countries and served more of less everywhere.
F104 I wouldn't include. Yes it served in Nato but only very limited penetration elsewhere, I also don't believe it better than the opposition (in a military or commercial manner) and it also lacked reliability.
All -104s had blown flaps. The F-104As and Cs had a Combat Flap setting that was good out to Mach 1.8, and better sustained turn than anything else at the time.Until the S model with blown flaps that solved high AOA and improved turning.
But it came too late.
If you are going to include Helicopters then I would include two
The Huey and the Sea King, both of which were licenced to other countries and served more of less everywhere.
F104 I wouldn't include. Yes it served in Nato but only very limited penetration elsewhere, I also don't believe it better than the opposition (in a military or commercial manner) and it also lacked reliability.
And what are you basing your assumption on? The F-5A wasn't top shelf but was able to hold it's own. Again, look what the F-5 did during the Iran/ Iraq war (I believe 6 kills)Why do I have a feeling that F-5A was totally inadequate for 1960s air combat,It certainly can beat MiG-21 in a dogfight but doesn't have an answer of Atoll.
And what's your point? This is meaningless!
So what? Northrop kept developing the F-5 line and the F-5E became available a decade later. It didn't make the earlier models any less capable at the time they were developed!And by the time Iran-Iraq war come around,Iran operated mostly F-5E too.
Thats funny. Taking the argument of a senator into a debate here. It like taken the National Enquirer as a worthy source.Even Senator Symington doesn't like F-5!
And by the time Iran-Iraq war come around,Iran operated mostly F-5E too.
Especially this senator who hated Northrop!Thats funny. Taking the argument of a senator into a debate here. It like taken the National Enquirer as a worthy source.
This was nicely done, there weren't any political or opinionated points made, all this was fact! I saw the upgrades being done at Bristol and later worked on some of the Botswana aircraft.This guy has a poor opinion of the CF-5 and does make some good points. Mainly, that the CF-5 was supposed to support peacekeeping missions rather than slug it out with the Soviets.
Bulgaria??? No - though it would make for an interesting Whiff.I believe that Bulgaria and Jordan are still flying them, among others.
Bulgaria? AFAIK never flew the F-5, Jordan did for sure.I believe that Bulgaria and Jordan are still flying them, among others. Jordan bought some that had been surplused by some NATO countries to supplement F-5's they already had. Originally Venezuela had planned to buy the F-5's that had been captured by the NVA after SVN fell but the US told them that spare parts would be VERY hard to find if they did that.