Greatest Fighter Aircraft of All Time

[syscom3]

The only drawback to the F14 was its crappy engines.

[evangilder]

Here is a linnk to a friend of mine's Tomcat shots, including the arrival of the last cruise at Oceana this past week.

http://www.haviland.org/gallery/thumbnails.php?album=1

[Gnomey]

Good shots there!

[plan_D]

You're talking about an interception from an aircraft carrier, steam catapulted from a ship is much different, and a lot quicker, than taking off from a concrete runway.

And even then, you haven't taken into account the climb to 44,000 feet while equipped with six Phoenix missiles. It would not be able to sustain 32,000 feet per minute while carrying that payload.

No one has denied that the F-14 has a superior avionics system, nor has anyone denied the weapons package is superior. What is being said is that the Lightning, from a ground strip, could be intercepting and destroying it's targets earlier than the F-14 could, even if it was carrying the Phoenix missile. Carrying a package of Sparrows just allows the Lightning so much of an advantage in the speed of interception it's not even worth mentioning.

[Hunter368]

Hello I have been read this thread alot. Could someone PlanD or anyone show us some pics of the Lightning and some performance stats for both F14 and Lightning. I never have been all that interested in jets but this is interesting to me. Excuse my lack of knowledge of both planes. I know alittle about the F14 but nothing about the Lightning (it sounds like a good plane from PlanD), is it still in use?

[102first_hussars]

Well lets see, a friend of mine who is now a Blackhawk Crewchief in my unit, was a Tomcat mechanic in the Navy and he said that when an alert happened it took them 2 minutes to get the first 2 Tomcats in the air, thats 2 minutes my friend. Not a bad time to get into the air. He said the next 2 would take about 3 to 4 minutes to get into the air. Okay 5 to 6 minutes for 4. So in 4 minutes you can have 30 to 35 Pheonix missles on Tomcats climbing to alltitude. Once the Tomcats are to Alltitude the Tomcat can fire those 30 to 35 missles at targets at ranges that the Lightning has to fly to.

I will say this again. The Tomcat is more overall capable than the Lightning, The Tomcat can carry a better overall weapons package than the Lightning, the Tomcat has a better overall avionix package than the Lightning, The Tomcat is the premier Cold War interceptor. The Tomcat is a better ovarall aircraft than the Lightning. Period!!!!

Thanky You!!!!!

I was kinda outnumbered there for a second...

[syscom3]

One thing Id like to point out is if the Tomcat was carrier based, there would be the potential of weather conditions at sea that would preclude the launching of any aircraft.

The Lightning would never see conditions like that thus could sortie.

[plan_D]

British Aerospace (English Electric) Lightning

Type: (F.6) Single-seat supersonic all-weather interceptor, strike and reconnaissance aircraft.

Powerplant: Two 15,680 lb Rolls-Royce Avon 302 turbojets.

Performance:

Top Speed: Mach 2.3 at 40,000 feet.

Range: (Internal fuel) 800 miles.

Rate of Climb: (Initial) 50,000 per minute.

Ceiling: 60,000 feet.*
Armament:

Two 30-mm Aden cannon (120 per gun) in forward ventral pack.

Two Firestreak or Red Top missiles on forward pylons, or 44 2-in spin-stabilized rockets. Or five Vinten 360 70-mm cameras. Underwing/Overwing hardpoints can carry up to 144 rockets or six 1,000 lbs HE, retarded or fire bombs.

The forward ventral tank could be removed, replacing the 30mm Aden with extra fuel.

*This is recorded ceiling, it has been since proven by various pilots that the Lightning could, in fact, reach heights greater than 60,000 feet. As one pilot, Mike Hale of 11 Sqdn. zoom climbed to 88,000 feet in his F.3 Lightning.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The British government still has not released the full capability of the EE Lightning. It's ability to climb above 60,000 feet was only released recently, but personally I knew it could all along. My dad did work on them for several years during the Cold War, after all.

The first Lightning flew in August 1954, but was yet to be called the Lightning. It was the P.1, and several days after it's first flight the P.1 achieved what is known as super-cruise. It surpassed Mach 1 without the use of afterburners (re-heat).

The P.1B, now known (unofficially) as the Lightning achieved Mach 2 on fully after-burning Avon engines. It could also achieve supercruise, something that the operational Lightnings could never do.

The marks of the Lightning are F.1, F.1A, F.2, F.2A, F.3, T.4, T.5 and F.6 for the RAF. The only other nation to use the EE Lightning was Saudi Arabia, F.53 and T.55 were their marks. These were re-conditioned F.3 (F.53) and T.5 (T.55).

The Saudi marks were capable of ground attack, and were the only Lightnings used against enemy targets in a border clash against Yemen. The only aircraft shot down by a Lightning was a pilotless Harrier that risked the lives as the pilot lost control and had to eject.

The Lightning was used on the frontline of interception throughout it's service life, both in Britain and Germany. 11 Sqdn. based at RAF Binbrook was my dads squadron, and Lightnings were scrambled daily ... sometimes three times a night to intercept Soviet Tu-95 'Bears' and various other Soviet bombers ...

The Lightning was the only NATO aircraft to intercept a Concorde travelling at Mach 2.2 at 57,000 feet. The Lightning not only caught, but overtook the Concorde while on stern intercept .

The Lightning left service in 1989 , when it was replaced by Panavia Tornado. The British government desired a multi-role capable aircraft, and saw no development potential in the Lightning.

There's few Lightnings left now, despite it being a wonder of a machine and definately a massive step forward in supersonic flight. It's design period began in 1947 ...

Anything else, just ask ...

[loomaluftwaffe]

why do i always see fighters right next to bombers as if they arent gonna bring the bomber down?

[Gnomey]

Cold war, to shoot it down would of brought reliation from the Soviets so they didn't, they just shadowed them until they where out of the West's airspace.

Good pics pD.

[Hunter368]

Thanks PlanD. Great information and nice jet.

[102first_hussars]

Originally Posted by syscom3

One thing Id like to point out is if the Tomcat was carrier based, there would be the potential of weather conditions at sea that would preclude the launching of any aircraft.

The Lightning would never see conditions like that thus could sortie.

Britain is well known for having retarded weather, so it doesnt matter whether its on land or the channel.

[loomaluftwaffe]

Originally Posted by Gnomey

Cold war, to shoot it down would of brought reliation from the Soviets so they didn't, they just shadowed them until they where out of the West's airspace.

Good pics pD.

then why are the bombers there? if they will bomb the others will retaliate and kill the bomber which will make the Soviets retaliate

[Gnomey]

It is all about testing the others capabilities. The Soviet bombers weren't going to bomb and the West's fighters weren't going to shoot them down (unless either was told too but both sides knew thee consequences). They were provocative flights that were more probing than offensive bombing missions.

[loomaluftwaffe]

and they didnt get anywhere, just wasted some fuel