Fighter comparisons

[Archangel]

I've really had enough "Tomcat v Hornet BS" and similar subjects...how about we compare planes that would actually face eachother? An F-14 won't ever fire a Phoenix at an F/A-18, nor will a Hornet try to kill a Tomcat at any point from now into the future. They are two planes with two different roles and lets leave it at that.
Now, in a different world, the real world, Tomcats, Hornets, Falcons and soon to be JSFs will be facing off with other planes...planes like the Fulcrum, Flanker, Super Flanker, maybe even older Foxbats...generally eastern-bloc nation planes.
Let's start off...The F-22 vs. the SU-37. The SU-37 is said by Shukohi (sp?) to be able to take on any western plane (As does MiG's MiG-1.44)but can the '37 really take on the 22?
In my opinion, yes and no. Whereas the SU is not a very stealthy plane, it has the vectored thrust nozzles, like the F-22, but also has forward canards, something the F-22 lacks.
They can be used to pull that extra G to get the advantage. At range, though, where RADAR-guidance is used over IR guidance, the F-22 really can't be seen. It can smack the 37 in the teeth with an AMRAAM. And yes, the new AIM-9X will help with the dogfighting.
Let's get some replys here, i'm sure i've probably pissed someone off even mentioning that the F-22 can get beat. Any planes at all to be debated?

 

[EA-6B1]

Not to stear off topic, but what's MiG stand for? I've always wondered. Oh, and I think most F-16 drivers call it the Viper. That's just what I've been told when I'd call it the Falcon. Thanks.

 

[Archangel]

MiG is something like Miyokan-Gueruvitch. The spelling is off, but it is something close to that. I'm pretty sure the company started with two men, and they named the company with their last names. (Heavy Metal special on the MiG-17) Correct me if i'm wrong

 

[zachary2777]

You can't shoot what you can't see. The range of AMRAAMs is a lot farther than you can see, and the F-22 wont show up on radar. It doesn't really matter that the MiG has canards, the pilot will die before he can use them.

Now if they got into a situation where they actually did have to dog fight (unlikely), then the F-22 could certainly hold its own. It's very fast as well as manueverable. The skill of the pilot helps too.

-Zak

Oh yea, AF pilots do call the F-16 the viper.

 

[Archangel]

BVR is definately a good way to engage, but the longer ranged the missile, it seems the less apt it is to hit. Longer range means heavier, more fuel needed, and less manouverable. If an Su-37 knows it's getting shot at, it shouldn't have a tough time evading even the AMRAAM. All in all, you do speak the truth...odds are, the Su would get killed before it could get in range...anyone got any info on the MiG-1.42/1.44? I heard it's also a stealth, making it a bit more of a match for the 22.

 

[Archangel]

Tomcat vs. Hornet again...Iesv Christe in excelsis, that's old. Tomcats are BVR birds that are getting older and older, less combat capable and we all know it, if it were 1974, everyone would have a different outlook on the 'Cat, it would be fresh and new, able to take anyone any time, even the F/A-18 in a dogfight...time has a horrable effect on aging planes though, and there is no way you'll see an A model Tomcat going against a MiG-29 and come out on top, even with an NFWS graduate in it's cockpit (maybe a D could still get lucky), but again, you're comparing planes in 2 seperate fields that are on the same side (Hornet and Tomcat). In today's world, if a MiG-29 were unfortunate enough to get shot at at 126mi out (beyond the Fulcrum's radar range) by an "A", not knowing it's getting fired upon, odds are it would go down, if an "A" was unlucky enough to be within 50mi of a Fulcrum, it would have to lite burner and get out as fast as possible or die trying...that's facts, 2 roles, 2 different advantages. One range, one manouverability...hows about MiG-29 vs Hornet? There's a good one, both have tight turning (only seen by the Tomcat in it's earliest days, and if the engines didn't stall), similar radar and weapon range, both are going to be seen into the early-mid 21st century, neither is stealth and both boast that they can beat one another. Evenly matched, same role, kind of like the F-22 vs. the MiG-1.42/1.44

 

[Archangel]

Okay, to reply to my own message, I did some research on the 1.44. It may also be called the MiG-39, and has as small a radar signature as the F-22, built in 30mm cannon, and fire-and-forget-missiles. It almost is an F-22, with a few more features that may actually give it an advantage over its American counterpart...the only problem is that it's breaking Russia's budget to make, and it is doubtful it could be made en masse or effectively enough to get a force of them in the near future. More to come, but it looks like the billions spent on the 22 is already starting to be outdone

 

[Archangel]

Which part...the Tomcat info is statistical, as well as with a convo with one Lt. Roert D. Woods, a Tomcat pilot who was with VF-211 during 2001 on the John C. Stennis. The other info about the MiG1.44 is completely statistical. It should be noted that the 1.44 is being/has been cut in favor of the Su-47 Berkut, another stealthy plane, though quite large, extremely manouverable.

 

[Fly Navy]

Odd that an 18 year old is spouting stuff about the Tomcat with no practical experience to back it up.

 

[bunk22]

What you don't understand Archangel, is you're on a forum with Naval aviators and SNA's. You have a good topic but you come across as a guy who's been there done that. That really doesn't fly in the world of those who actually do it. There are a few fighter types who I'm sure will chime in here with real world experience and they are really the ones who can back up their talk. For example, lets say you start NROTC and show up as a 4th class midshipman wearing a flight jacket. The appearance of things is you've been there done that. Yeah, it's just a flight jacket but perception is everything. Just trying to give a little advice. FLY NAVY!

 

[vegita1220]

You do realize half the info on Russian birds is sketchy at best, and often made up of outright lies. I remember seeing something about a MiG 1.44 equipped with a plasma cloud jammer to defeat the F-22s AMRAAMs. The other half is very vague, often claiming their planes will outperform US counterparts, but with little evidence. Funny, i remember hearing a MiG-29 equipped with AA-11s and Amraamskis could theoretically beat back a Western Air Force(that's not what happened in Desert Storm One is it)? Poor bastards got clobbered by BVR missile shots cued in by AWACS...suckers didn't know what was coming, and this is WITHOUT stealth against a supposedly superior platform.
Regardless, why do we care about this? One F-22 costs in the 100+ million dollars range, no matter which numbers you choose to believe. Add onto that the enormous R and D costs of the whole ATF project(ballpark estimate-at least over 2 billion dollars) which probably also utilized previous design experience in past design projects to cut overall costs, as well as the costs of Russia retooling its factories to modern plants as well as a computer industry to power all those fancy stealthy fly by wire planes they can dream of, and you're talking costs would probably give the Russian economy a massive coronary overnight. Point being, nobody could afford it, and nobody out there has the same experience we have making things that fly. I don't even mean Russia couldn't afford to produce the planes. I don't think it has the money to DESIGN the planes. Nobody's done stealth yet, despite the F-117 being public for years(making me wonder why we're offering JSF to so many different nations).

In all honesty, I'd pay more attention to China's military buildup. They're hoping to emulate the MiG 1.44 and Su-47 projects and they actually may have the money to field them in significant numbers.

Btw, I KNOW an F-14A flown by a non-NFWS grad has beaten a MiG-29 flown by a German fighter instructor...so actually it is possible. I also doubt a "fresh" Tomcat could beat a Hornet in a dogfight. Ever seen the Blue Angels high alpha pass? Even a Hornet C also has full controllability up to what...50 degrees AoA, right? Even without JHMCS and AIM-9X, I don't see a Hornet losing to a Tomcat in a dogfight. Maverick's "I'll hit the brakes and he'll fly right by us" has nothing on the Hornet.

PS Pat, what'd you do to get restricted from Prowlers? I hear one of the major gripes from that community came after they imposed a G limit and cut tactical flight profiles(low and fast) from the training.

 

[petescheu]

Pmak-
Probably had to do with your sitting/leg/some other height. I think prowlers is an easy one to get out of in terms of height, I've known several people that are DQed. Some of my other friends are getting "remeasured" after they got picked up for the jet program to get out of the Prowler slots.

 

[ben]

Originally posted by shoo24
Pmak-
Probably had to do with your sitting/leg/some other height. I think prowlers is an easy one to get out of in terms of height, I've known several people that are DQed. Some of my other friends are getting "remeasured" after they got picked up for the jet program to get out of the Prowler slots.

Not that I'll be there anytime soon, but do you know which measurements are the most important? Are these guys too big or small?

I'm a long way out from flight school with a couple of big hurdles (graduating from school then OCS) staring me in the face, but I'm curious to know just the same.

 

[Ryoukai]

Regarding the letter posted by Pat, what does the speaker mean when he says, "could barely get to a merge because of bent systems."?

 

[Sins]

http://www.military.cz/russia/air/mig/Mig_39/mig_39.htm
vid including Mig-39
http://www.stud.fee.vutbr.cz/~xvisin00/ who here can read russian?

The Mig 39/1.44 looks almost like the firefox that clint eastwood stole back in the early 90's.