mirage doing tail slide?

[nscode]

And if he has a heater, by going strait for it, you acheave.... what now?

[p_o_d_2_2]

strange enough that American air force chose to upgrade F-18 design to super hornet.

 

ask u self Why not to super Eagle/super falcon :)?

 

I think those are called F-22's and F-35's.

[GGTharos]

There is no end to this discussion, Pilotasso U can continue to believe in F-16/F-15,

strange enough that American air force chose to upgrade F-18 design to super hornet.

 

ask u self Why not to super Eagle/super falcon :)?

 

Ask yourself why is it that the US Air Force did NOT in fact buy ANY F-18's whatsoever?

 

Further, ask yourself why the NAVY bought the new F-18's, which are really F-18's in external similarity ONLY, and are in fact an entirely new aircraft while waiting on the carrier version of the F-35.

 

In the meantime, the USAF has their F-22, upgraded F-15's and F-16's, as well as the pending order for a large number of F-35's.

 

While at it, ask yourself why the YF-17 (basically the F-18 ) lost in competition against the YF-16 to begin with.

[RedTiger]

I know of a real air force that sent singles in combat missions. Pilots were agenst it, but no one asked them for opinions.

 

*sigh*

 

You know what I'm talking about, optimal conditions. No offense was intended.

[GGTharos]

I don't think nscode was insulted - he just pointed out that the 'fair scenario' isn't necessarily realistic and that pilots don't always get to pick their fights.

 

Though while correct, it probably isn't helpful in the turn-fighter v evergy-fighter thing ;)

[Teknetinium]

F-22 is not for sale GG and I put my money on Super Hornet rather then on F-35.

 

that's just me.

[GGTharos]

I never said the F-22 was for sale. Where did that come from?

Everyone who is 'in the know', including a recent evaluation of the various fighters by the Netherlands puts the F-35 ahead of the F-18E+ in capability.

 

So yes, it is just you ;)

 

F-22 is not for sale GG and I put my money on Super Hornet rather then on F-35.

 

that's just me.

[504Goon]

why is it so hard to understand for u that u put ur nose at the bandit as fast as possible. plz stop living in training exercises.

In real life u dont know if ur Russian friend has a heater or not.

(He probably do):) or are u taking the chance like the other guy in HL.

 

 

There is no end to this discussion, Pilotasso U can continue to believe in F-16/F-15,

strange enough that American air force chose to upgrade F-18 design to super hornet.

 

ask u self Why not to super Eagle/super falcon :)?

As someone has already pointed out, rate kills. So yes, you are 100% correct. And to maintaing the best possible turning rate your aircraft can offer you must do...what? :) And if the missiles are involved and you've spent all your smash in that best break turn you'll ever do and fire a low Pk shot, the other guy dumped flares pre-emptively and spoofed your missile..

[mikoyan]

Ask yourself why is it that the US Air Force did NOT in fact buy ANY F-18's whatsoever?

 

Further, ask yourself why the NAVY bought the new F-18's, which are really F-18's in external similarity ONLY, and are in fact an entirely new aircraft while waiting on the carrier version of the F-35.

 

In the meantime, the USAF has their F-22, upgraded F-15's and F-16's, as well as the pending order for a large number of F-35's.

 

While at it, ask yourself why the YF-17 (basically the F-18 ) lost in competition against the YF-16 to begin with.

 

because it was more expensive and complex going against the idea of getting a cheap front line fighter to replace the f-104 that the nato was using

[GGTharos]

... replace a high-altitude, high-mach interceptor with a lightweight fighter meant for dogfighting?

 

The cost I'll buy though ;)

 

because it was more expensive and complex going against the idea of getting a cheap front line fighter to replace the f-104 that the nato was using

[nscode]

I don't think nscode was insulted - he just pointed out that the 'fair scenario' isn't necessarily realistic and that pilots don't always get to pick their fights.

 

Though while correct, it probably isn't helpful in the turn-fighter v evergy-fighter thing ;)

 

 

yup, none taken :) I just had to point it out, as it was repeated several times.

 

 

And it just goes to show that when it comes to the real thing, there are no rules.

[Pilotasso]

As someone has already pointed out, rate kills. So yes, you are 100% correct. And to maintaing the best possible turning rate your aircraft can offer you must do...what? :) And if the missiles are involved and you've spent all your smash in that best break turn you'll ever do and fire a low Pk shot, the other guy dumped flares pre-emptively and spoofed your missile..

 

Never mind, the discussion is more and more off topic every time someone makes a good point about not becoming an airbrake at the merge. :)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Never mind, the discussion is more and more off topic every time someone makes a good point about not becoming an airbrake at the merge. :)

"Air brake" that can sustain the turn rate? So, what's wrong with that kind of an "airbrake"?

[GGTharos]

Airbrakes can't sustain anything.

 

"Air brake" that can sustain the turn rate? So, what's wrong with that kind of an "airbrake"?

[Frostie]

Surely the only thing that matters is making the kill - airbrake or not, Russian a/c developers create their fighters to deal with all kinds of fighters and to deal with HighEnergy ones they have the ideal weapon its called 'Schlem R-73'.

 

If an enemy takes the fight this way the fight range is going to be greater and more open so a High AoA turn for schlem firing (an R-73 has more energy and greater climb rate than any fighter) is the obvious choice, game over.

If it was just about gun v gun then thats a different story but RL ain't a balanced scenario.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Airbrakes can't sustain anything.

Airbrakes can not but "airbrakes" can. ;)

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP!

[Teknetinium]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qphv_3F4UVA

crazy stall, he dose everything, tail slide, back slide even 360 flip if u like:), amazing how fast he recovers it, The F-22 just give u two bipping sounds and u are

flying again.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rW3nlVehmE&NR=1

F-18

 

 

Famous air show brake :)

 

I would appreciate a F-16/F-15/JAS-39/Rafal/EF-2000 stall recover videos.

Edited November 30, 2008 by Teknetinium

[mikoyan]

If high aoa is so bad why does the f-18 super hornet and f-22 can reach alfa greater than 25 degrees?

 

just my two cents.

[Pilotasso]

It has been explained before. Try catching up previous posts.

[GGTharos]

As a lesson that -should- have been taken away from a certain Red Flag debrief - if you abuse your AoA - even in an F-22 - you'll get shot out of the sky.

 

The F-22 is a 'sustained 60deg AoA' fighter, but that AoA can be met unly under certain conditions and for certain purposes.

 

Basically the argument that AoA is panacea is like me saying 'The F-15C will just blow everything up from BVR without ever being in danger so it's not like russian fighter maneuverability matters' ;)

 

High AoA capability is an advantage ... when you are -slow- and in a neutral or offensive position against an enemy with similarly low energy but worse AoA handling.

 

If high aoa is so bad why does the f-18 super hornet and f-22 can reach alfa greater than 25 degrees?

 

just my two cents.

[Pilotasso]

Exactly and adding to that, F-22's TVC is also aimed at high speed maneuverability where other planes tend to go in straight line.

[RedTiger]

I thought I'd try to explain this another way. Something Teknetinium said in an earlier post made me thing of this:

 

why is it so hard to understand for u that u put ur nose at the bandit as fast as possible. plz stop living in training exercises.

 

Lets just say for the moment that I agree with you, because I do. Here's my example: which would you rather have; the ability to get your nose on the bandit and kill him in 5 seconds but have a 10 second "cool-down" period where you can't evade and you can't switch targets OR would you rather have the ability to get your nose on him and kill him in 15 seconds with *no* "cool-down" period? Once you get your kill you can switch targets or evade immediately.

 

There is no right or wrong answer to this. Its like me saying "you're building a house, which tool do you want, a hammer or a saw?". Well, you ideally want -both- because each situation may require a different tool. The difference between building a house and fighting in a fighter jet is that one is life or death, the other...no so much (I guess your shoddy carpentry could cause the house to collapse and kill you! :D).

 

But what if you could only have one? If we talk in terms of having only one choice, you can't have both tools, then the answer becomes more concrete. In my relatively few years of life, everything has told me that efficiency, sustainability, and multitasking are, by far, the best things to shoot for. I want to kill as many birds with one stone as I can and then already have 10 more stones in my pocket ready to go to start killing more. If I have a grill ready to get a meal for my family from those birds I'm killing, all the better! If I can kill 5 birds with one stone but have to pause and and risk having those birds peck my eyeballs out, I'd rather kill just 2 if it means that I don't have to stop and risk harm. If I have to resort to killing only one bird with one stone, I'll get a friend to help or I'll bug out and come back with grenades tomorrow. ;)

 

It terms of BFM/ACM, I think its clear what "efficiency, sustainability, and multitasking" translates to. I would take that any day over the alternative but all the while be figuring out how I can have both. ;)

[Teknetinium]

My vision is 5 vs 5 BVR,U must go for a kill no bugging out for refuel rearm. The last 2 will end up in a turning fight that's my vision.

 

Im not talking about F-22, lets say 5 F-16 vs 5 Mirages 20000.

Therefore its better to have airframe that could even take u to high AOA if needed.

 

Yes F-22 proves it all. give a plane better engines TTW ,and he will make good sustained turnes, F-16/F-15/su-27/F-18 all their engines have been upgraded, but only F-18 aerodynamic frame has been remade,same whit avionics, for me the most important is airframes aerodynamic. U dont change that so often,

I think those days are gone where u aim only for energy(F-15 is designed to fight Mig-25/31). its about to find good balance, like F-22/F-18 to have true multi role aircrafts.

Edited November 30, 2008 by Teknetinium

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

High AoA capability is an advantage ... when you are -slow- and in a neutral or offensive position against an enemy with similarly low energy but worse AoA handling.

Thank you GG! Case closed.

 

Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP

[Pilotasso]

Nope, its not exactly what has been said here if you read teks and vatis posts. They support the idea you dont bleed off speed in a high AOA manuevers and that you should do it for nose pointing as the first thing you should do at the merge, plus the F-16 is ill designed. you dont want to become traped in the others aircraft strongest side, rather explore yours. High AOA doesnt bring you an davnatage if the target does not play your game.

 

What GG said in your quote, goes against these misconceptions.

Edited December 1, 2008 by Groove