Basher54321 Posted May 27, 2015 Posted May 27, 2015 Perhaps a better timeframe for the comparison would've been 1965-70, and I'd like it if a moderator could adjust the title to reflect that. Here's the view from the Lightning cockpit, which to me looks just as good or better than the two others: I am talking about the top of the canopy. I have accurate figures for most of the F-8 versions - however if you want to go to 1965-70 there is something even better than EM charts for a MiG-21F-13 v F-8E comparison - that being the once secret 1969 "Have Doughnut" report which was the physical evaluation of an acquired MiG-21F-13 - this was flown against a variety of USAF and USN aircraft. If only there was similar for the Lightning! In it the MiG-21F-13 was said to have overall turn performance very similar to the F-5E/N - one reason why the F-5 was the MiG-21 simulator. Here is some snips of info on F-8E v MiG-21F-13 performance.
mattebubben Posted May 27, 2015 Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) I have but 1 thing to add to this thread. http://media.moddb.com/images/groups/1/3/2044/J-35_Draken_8.jpg Edited May 27, 2015 by mattebubben
mvsgas Posted May 27, 2015 Posted May 27, 2015 Very cool man, thanks. Easily found on the net also. To whom it may concern, I am an idiot, unfortunately for the world, I have a internet connection and a fondness for beer....apologies for that. Thank you for you patience. Many people don't want the truth, they want constant reassurance that whatever misconception/fallacies they believe in are true..
Basher54321 Posted May 27, 2015 Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) Both the F8u and the F6 had inflight refueling (AFAIK) This would allow them to refuel prior to or after combat ( or both) So pilot could use AB/reheat more frequently, giving more power and better chance to succeed in maintaining energy. No point of wining the fight if you can't make it home. Advantage F6 and F8 Unfortunate I do not know how effective the Redtop / Firestreak where successful nor reliable. Same goes for the AA-2/R-3, etc. Where they used on other aircraft in combat? I believe the AIM-9 was used extensively and was fairly successful in several conflicts. Maybe the F-8 on this one? The cannons where used on other aircraft? How effective/reliable where the canons? ( Aden, Mk-12, NR-30) - Some website say the MIg-21F-13 NR-30 had only 30 rounds, 2 seconds worth of firing, not the best weapon. ? AA-2 was used a lot in combat - Arab v Israel wars 60s - 80s / VPAF / Iraq in the 80s of my head. In the 60s one Israeli historian claims Israel captured some AA-2s when taking over the Sinai in the 60s and wired them for use - they thought they were superior to the Shafrir 1 (which was terrible) - the first AA-2 was literally an AIM-9B copy though by accounts. No comment on Redtop / Firestreak performance - both had restrictive firing parameters as described in the manual - as you would expect. I think the MiG-21F-13 magazine held 60 rounds - but only 30 were usually loaded - something like that. ( I am aware the MiG-21F had 2 cannon and thus 2 * 60 round magazines) Edited May 27, 2015 by Basher54321
Hummingbird Posted May 27, 2015 Author Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) I am talking about the top of the canopy. I have accurate figures for most of the F-8 versions - however if you want to go to 1965-70 there is something even better than EM charts for a MiG-21F-13 v F-8E comparison - that being the once secret 1969 "Have Doughnut" report which was the physical evaluation of an acquired MiG-21F-13 - this was flown against a variety of USAF and USN aircraft. If only there was similar for the Lightning! In it the MiG-21F-13 was said to have overall turn performance very similar to the F-5E/N - one reason why the F-5 was the MiG-21 simulator. Here is some snips of info on F-8E v MiG-21F-13 performance. Very good info Basher! One thing that surprises me is the wing loading difference, as my figures actually put the F-8E & MiG-21 almost square equal at 77 lb/sq.ft vs 78.3 lb/sq.ft respectively. The high alpha capability of the MiG-21 doesn't surprise me, that's the delta wing at work there, but the energy loss was also higher. The F-8 featured superior sustained turn performance as expected due to the higher lift available, but the lower load limit obviously was a disadvantage as was the lower T/W ratio. Do you know wether the F-8's leading edge devices functioned at speed or wether they were limited to landing and take off? By comparison the EE Lightning F.6 featured the lowest wing loading of the bunch at 76 lb/sq.ft, and according to RAF pilots the aircraft was a stellar turner with excellent high alpha capability, and as you quoted yourself able to best even some of the best modern jets in the WVR department. One striking feature of the Lightning was its thicker cambered wing in comparison to the two other aircraft. The rate of climb for the Lightning F.6 was a massive 50,000 ft/min, compared to the 36,000 ft/min of the MiG-21 and 32,000 ft/min of the F-8E. Edited May 28, 2015 by Hummingbird
Hummingbird Posted May 27, 2015 Author Posted May 27, 2015 Here are the figures I could find: EE Lightning F.6 Wing loading = 76 lb/sq.ft T/W = 0.78 Rate of climb = 50,000 ft/min Top speed = 1,300 mph Range (internal fuel) = 850 miles Crusader F-8E Wing loading = 77 lb/sq.ft T/W = 0.62 Rate of climb = 32,000 ft/min Top speed = 1,225 mph Range (internal fuel) = 800 miles MiG-21PF Wing loading = 78.5 lb/sq.ft T/W = 0.80 Rate of climb = 36,000 ft/min Top speed = 1,351 mph Range (internal fuel) = 750 miles
Random Posted May 27, 2015 Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) Those rates of climb seem very suspect. Possibly attainable briefly by going at max speed at sea level then pulling up hard.... Also what weights are you using for TWR and wing loading? A quick google yielded a lower TWR for the mig.... I think I can now figure out sustained turn rates for the lightning. Give me until tomorrow evening ;) We need to look a bit more at weapons... I know redtop was designed as a bomber killer so maybe not the most agile missile but if the target was supersonic it could detect and home on the hot skin of the target. Its seeker could be slaved to the radar iirc too leading to faster aquisition and finally the lightning had computer commanded intercept. The computer would display a marker you centre on the radar screen to bring you into a firing solution While also setting fusing of the redtop for the closing speeds (head on would be a short delay, tail chase would be a longer delay) What sidewinder variants could the crusader use? Any all aspect capability? Likewise what would the migs missiles be able to do in head on engagements? Edited May 27, 2015 by Random
Basher54321 Posted May 27, 2015 Posted May 27, 2015 What sidewinder variants could the crusader use? Any all aspect capability? Likewise what would the migs missiles be able to do in head on engagements? AIM-9C/D/E/G in this period D/E/G being rear aspect IR only (D got the F-8 kills without checking) AIM-9C was the only all aspect version being SARH - never fired in combat that I know of (K-13R was Soviet SARH type in the 60s - again never used??)
Basher54321 Posted May 27, 2015 Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) Here are the figures I could find: EE Lightning F.6 Wing loading = 76 lb/sq.ft T/W = 0.78 --- Been there done that - and it doesn't match up with reality at all (too simplistic - too many things not accounted for) - also note what Random says RE climb and range - not simple figures (btw the lightning F.6 has the highest WL in my figures of the 3 - figures vary with sources for empty weights etc ) Range - what was the flight profile and loadout Climb - what was the Start altitude/speed/angle of climb / loadout / weight EM charts are better. On the F-8 the leading edge flaps droop automatically on jacks when the variable incidence wing is raised. You will note they tried raising the wing to improve slow speed in those bits I posted - but didn't make much different to slow speed handling Benefits of high lift devices on modern jets come from computer control and optimisation in the turn. Edited May 27, 2015 by Basher54321
Hummingbird Posted May 28, 2015 Author Posted May 28, 2015 (edited) Been there done that - and it doesn't match up with reality at all (too simplistic - too many things not accounted for) - also note what Random says RE climb and range - not simple figures (btw the lightning F.6 has the highest WL in my figures of the 3 - figures vary with sources for empty weights etc ) Range - what was the flight profile and loadout Climb - what was the Start altitude/speed/angle of climb / loadout / weight EM charts are better. Maybe, it was merely the figures I could find via a quick search. The F.6 was said to match the F-15C in climb rate though, also being able to rotate off the strip faster (within 500 m). That says quite a bit IMHO. The F.6 also featured a larger cambered wing than the pervious versions of the Lightning, and so the wing loading was kept pretty low. Should be 288 kg/sq.m for the F.6 at empty weight (12,719 kg / 44.08 sq.m), and 370 kg/sq.m with 1/2 fuel (enough for 425-450 mi) and two redtop missiles. Also the F.2A, which was basically just an F.6 with two 30mm guns in the nose and more room for extra fuel in the belly tank, was slightly lighter and featured a range of 900 miles on internal fuel. So the F.2A would probably be the best variant of the Lightning. Apparently the F.6 & F.2A also maxed out at 1,500 mph (Mach 2.3), not 1,300. On the F-8 the leading edge flaps droop automatically on jacks when the variable incidence wing is raised. You will note they tried raising the wing to improve slow speed in those bits I posted - but didn't make much different to slow speed handling Benefits of high lift devices on modern jets come from computer control and optimisation in the turn. Yeah that's what I was wondering, without automatic control in all aspects of flight those LE devices are useless at everything but landing and take off as they simply don't function anywhere else. Thus the F-8 has no real advantage wing wise over the other two afterall, except for a lower sweep being more useful at lower speeds and providing some advantages in sustained maneuvering. Edited May 28, 2015 by Hummingbird
Random Posted May 28, 2015 Posted May 28, 2015 (edited) The F.6 was said to match the F-15C in climb rate though, also being able to rotate off the strip faster (within 500 m). That says quite a bit IMHO. Also the F.2A, which was basically just an F.6 with two 30mm guns in the nose and more room for extra fuel in the belly tank, was slightly lighter and featured a range of 900 miles on internal fuel. So the F.2A would probably be the best variant of the Lightning. Apparently the F.6 & F.2A also maxed out at 1,500 mph (Mach 2.3), not 1,300. . Could only match an eagle if you ran very light.... No ventral tank, no weapons and very little fuel etc... F2a had lower powered engines too which helped with range. Mach 2.2 was above VNE for the F.6 though may have been possible in some atmospheric conditions it couldn't be done in ICAO conditions according to the graphs in my manual. Edited May 28, 2015 by Random
Hummingbird Posted May 28, 2015 Author Posted May 28, 2015 Could only match an eagle if you ran very light.... No ventral tank, no weapons and very little fuel etc... F2a had lower powered engines too which helped with range. Mach 2.2 was above VNE for the F.6 though may have been possible in some atmospheric conditions it couldn't be done in ICAO conditions according to the graphs in my manual. What does the manual say about dimensions, weights, loadings etc etc? I'd trust that more than the figures I found on the net. Also what MiG-21 should we compare it to? The F-13 was the lightest MiG-21, and very short legged. Would it be the MiG-21bis we have to compare it to?
WinterH Posted May 28, 2015 Posted May 28, 2015 For MiG-21, PFM (mid 60ies), MF (1970 I think?) and Bis ('72) would be the candidates in my opinion. F-13 entered service in 60, and while lightest, it is also the one with worst avionics, shortest range, worst payload, and weakest engine. As far as gun armament goes, PFM can carry in GSh-23L in a ventral pod, MF and Bis have it internally. Unlike F-13's 30mm guns with 30 rounds, these carry 200 or 250 rounds. Although, if I'm not mistaken, Lightning F.6 also has it's gun armament in form of a ventral, conformal pod? Now that I think about it, 60s-mid 70s period is full of some of the most iconic fighters, F-4, F-5, MiG-23, MiG-25, Draken, and Viggen also all fit more or less. Along with a varierty of Mirages. Hell, even F-14 fits in there barely :) Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V DCS-Dismounts Script
Random Posted May 28, 2015 Posted May 28, 2015 Yep guns in the ventral tank for the F.6 and agree that yhe 60s-70s was the best era for jets that would become iconic. Hummingbird I'll try to post that info tonight.
Basher54321 Posted May 28, 2015 Posted May 28, 2015 Also what MiG-21 should we compare it to? The F-13 was the lightest MiG-21, and very short legged. Would it be the MiG-21bis we have to compare it to? The bis is beyond your 1970 end time - on the other hand it is basically the ultimate production variant like the F.6 - but really the MiG-21F-13 and F6 both were active between 65-70. There are a ton of MiG-21 versions. The PF types and PFM saw a lot of action and added more fuel and radar (bigger nose cone) - different engines - and a GP-9 gun pod for some countries (thats the 23mm pod mentioned above). The MF I mentioned before was the export version of the SM and came in around 1970 so you could consider that still. The F-13 - although shown to have slightly less endurance than the F-8E in the report did better than I thought it would for a point defense interceptor. The Lightning was also considered short legged - but neither were intended to operate that far from home bases.
WinterH Posted May 28, 2015 Posted May 28, 2015 Original thread title says 70-75 so that's whay I've mentioned Bis among candidates. For 65-70 yes it is late. Though, however you look at it, F-13 would be the wrong version. It is almost the earliest production version of MiG-21. I think PFM fits early time frame, Bis fits the late one, while the SM/MF fits either (however barely for 65-70 one) Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V DCS-Dismounts Script
Basher54321 Posted May 28, 2015 Posted May 28, 2015 Hummingbird wanted to change it to 65-70 which is where I thought we were now. The 1969 USAF / USN comparisons for the F-13 are the best I've seen - but can be used as a basis for speculation on the other versions perhaps.
Hummingbird Posted May 28, 2015 Author Posted May 28, 2015 Yep guns in the ventral tank for the F.6 and agree that yhe 60s-70s was the best era for jets that would become iconic. Hummingbird I'll try to post that info tonight. Sounds good Random, thanks :)
Hummingbird Posted May 28, 2015 Author Posted May 28, 2015 Hummingbird wanted to change it to 65-70 which is where I thought we were now. The 1969 USAF / USN comparisons for the F-13 are the best I've seen - but can be used as a basis for speculation on the other versions perhaps. The later versions of the MiG-21 were quite abit heavier though (the MF was over 1200 kg heavier empty, and the bis 1400 kg etc), which would hurt maneuverability a lot. However as far as I can tell the performance pretty much stayed the same thanks to a more powerful engine.
Hummingbird Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) Long time since the last post here, but I've been looking abit into the F-8 again and it does seem like the LE devices were functional in flight as well, and not just during landing. Thus the F-8 has this advantage over the others. LE flaps deployed in slow flight: LE flaps retracted in fast flight: Also I've heared that therewas a US Navy F-8 vs F-4 comparison made at some point, does anyone where one can locate the details of this? Edited February 11, 2016 by Hummingbird
IvanK Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 (edited) I'll dig out what data I can though average height and speeds are a little tricky as that kinda depends on what you are doing... Combat record for the lightning is easy... was never used in anger. Service life for the F.6 was 1964 or 65 off the top of my head until 1987 or 88 though I don't think you can really claim that length of service = pilot skill.... Actually the Saudis did use it in anger in Air to mud using their F MK53 variant and lost at least one to AAA :) For those that want to look some pretty decent FMK6 performance charts are around.... might need to spend a few dollars though. As to which was regarded as the best .... the pilots pretty much all agree the FMK2A .... max fuel of all variants and 2 x 30mm in the upper nose. Biggest drawback with the lightnings was G limit it was a very real 6G limited aircraft. it also had a relatively low Max IAS limit of 650k Two charts Sust turn and Full AB climb (left climb chart is clean right climb chart with 2 x Redtop missiles) Edited February 11, 2016 by IvanK 1
Hummingbird Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 Excellent stuff Ivan! Do you by any chance know where I could acquire the manual those charts are from? :)
Hummingbird Posted February 11, 2016 Author Posted February 11, 2016 Now if only we could get similar charts for the F-8, been searching high and low myself for such charts but without any luck - which is odd cause there's plenty on the F-4 and F-104 for example.
Basher54321 Posted February 11, 2016 Posted February 11, 2016 Long time since the last post here, but I've been looking abit into the F-8 again and it does seem like the LE devices were functional in flight as well, and not just during landing. Thus the F-8 has this advantage over the others. Interesting - had to pull out the NATOPS to double check this. The LEFs had three manual positions that could be selected by the pilot with the incidence wing in the down position as above. So the first photos look like Cruise droop position (~6 degree down inner) , the last would be in the clean position (no droop), and there was also a spin droop position (~36 degree down inner).
Recommended Posts