 | F-14 vs F-15 vs F-16| Polls Discuss F-14 vs F-15 vs F-16 in the World War II - Aviation forums; Which is the best fighter in your opinion regardless of track record, based mostly on ability, flight characteristics etc etc..
... |
|
10-22-2008, 07:23 PM
|
#1 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,122
| F-14 vs F-15 vs F-16 Which is the best fighter in your opinion regardless of track record, based mostly on ability, flight characteristics etc etc..
I know this will be an interesting debate when I will start off by saying I believe the F-14 is the best, and yet it is the only one of the three to be out of service (mostly due to cost & maintenance issues).
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland |
| |
10-22-2008, 08:25 PM
|
#2 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,635
Country: | They each performed the role for which they were designed very well.
F-15 most dominating
F-14 most innovative
F-16 most cost effective
The F-14 was a fantastic plane but to attain the mantle of "Best" I believe cost, maintenance and longevity must be considered. That makes me like the F-15.
But If I were in a short war had to choose between an air force consisting solely of 500 F-14s or 500 F-15's, I'd have to choose the F-14 cause of the Phoenix missile.
,
__________________ “Despite the threat of SAMs and increasing visibility on 31 January 1991, one gunship opted to stay and continue to protect the Marines. A SAM subsequently shot down this AC-130H, call sign Spirit 03. All 14 crew members of Spirit 03 perished." www.NewMediaPerspective.com |
| |
10-22-2008, 09:07 PM
|
#3 | | aka Dickcheese
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Washington State
Posts: 11,441
Country: | Wow. Rather a silly discussion isn't it? Without some operational context, mission need and order of battle this quickly will blur into a debate about "top speed", "range" and "best load-out".
I'll pass.
__________________ 
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if
they made a difference in the world. But, the [U.S.]
Marines don't have that problem."
-- Ronald Reagan Master of Duplicate Posts |
| |
10-23-2008, 12:04 AM
|
#4 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Pine Mountain Lake, California
Posts: 844
Country: | Gotta go with the F-15, especially considering it's >100-to-0 victory ratio. Unfortunately, the F-14 was originally hampered by it's '60's-era TF-30 low bypass-ratio turbofans, which didn't provide enough thrust to make it competitive with contemporary fighters (like the F-15 and -16); it didn't really come into it's own until it (finally) received the engine it should've had from the beginning, the GE F-110, with a 25% increase in dry thrust. The ultimate model of the Tomcat, the F-14D, was really too late to have an effect on naval tactics.
However, if I had to chose an a/c for a 1-v-1 encounter, I would choose the F-15C over a late-model Tomcat, even with the Phoenix AIM-54C; for a fighter, the F-15 has the most advanced ECM suite of any a/c flying (with the exception of the F-22), so I believe the on-board AN/ALQ-135 EIC of the Eagle would probably defeat the terminal guidance radar of the Phoenix, giving the -15 the chance to hit the Tomcat with it's AIM-120C AMRAAM's at +/- 50 NM. If the F-15 fails to jam or spoof the Phoenix, it should be able to outmaneuver the Mach 6 Phoenix before impact.
__________________ |
| |
10-23-2008, 12:10 AM
|
#5 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,635
Country: | >>it should be able to outmaneuver the Mach 6 Phoenix before impact.<<
For me that s the crux of the matter... an F-14 with 4 phoenix missiles is pretty damn menacing but the Phoenix is large and old school. Could the F-15 out maneuver a phoenix?
"Should" is not an answer.. what do the sims say?
.
__________________ “Despite the threat of SAMs and increasing visibility on 31 January 1991, one gunship opted to stay and continue to protect the Marines. A SAM subsequently shot down this AC-130H, call sign Spirit 03. All 14 crew members of Spirit 03 perished." www.NewMediaPerspective.com |
| |
10-23-2008, 12:28 AM
|
#6 | | aka Dickcheese
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Washington State
Posts: 11,441
Country: | The Phoenix is not a fighter-v-fighter weapon. It was designed to intercept slow and non-manueverable Soviet Bombers. While it does have a high max speed, that speed is NOT maintained during its continous flight. The Phoenix employs a maintainer motor once it reaches max-E altitude. Any fighter that detects the incoming missile has a high probability of outmaneuvering the Phoenix, since it was not designed to be a dogfighting missile.
Couple this with early problems Hughes encountered in mission readiness, the standdown of Soviet bombers and there is a reason that F-14Ds were not often seen loaded up with 6 Phoenix missiles as a typical loadout.
__________________ 
"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if
they made a difference in the world. But, the [U.S.]
Marines don't have that problem."
-- Ronald Reagan Master of Duplicate Posts |
| |
10-23-2008, 12:52 AM
|
#7 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,635
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt308
I'll pass. | A wise man once said that he would pass.
Did you say something Matt??? Or are you contributing?? 
__________________ “Despite the threat of SAMs and increasing visibility on 31 January 1991, one gunship opted to stay and continue to protect the Marines. A SAM subsequently shot down this AC-130H, call sign Spirit 03. All 14 crew members of Spirit 03 perished." www.NewMediaPerspective.com |
| |
10-23-2008, 01:35 AM
|
#8 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Pine Mountain Lake, California
Posts: 844
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt308 The Phoenix is not a fighter-v-fighter weapon. It was designed to intercept slow and non-manueverable Soviet Bombers. While it does have a high max speed, that speed is NOT maintained during its continous flight. The Phoenix employs a maintainer motor once it reaches max-E altitude. Any fighter that detects the incoming missile has a high probability of outmaneuvering the Phoenix, since it was not designed to be a dogfighting missile.
Couple this with early problems Hughes encountered in mission readiness, the standdown of Soviet bombers and there is a reason that F-14Ds were not often seen loaded up with 6 Phoenix missiles as a typical loadout. | Well said, Matt (as usual); in fact, the typical loadout for a late-model F-14 (B's & D's) was four AIM-7F Sparrows and/or AMRAAM's on the fuselage stations, and four AIM-9M's on the glove pylons. The Phoenix was actually pretty useless for fighter-v-fighter combat, especially under current ROE.
And even during the height of the Cold War, a 6-Phoenix loadout was very rare; the A's typically carried four AIM-54's on the fuselage pallets, and Sparrows & Sidewinders on the glove pylons.
__________________ |
| |
10-23-2008, 01:43 AM
|
#9 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,635
Country: | Therefor the thread is valid...
__________________ “Despite the threat of SAMs and increasing visibility on 31 January 1991, one gunship opted to stay and continue to protect the Marines. A SAM subsequently shot down this AC-130H, call sign Spirit 03. All 14 crew members of Spirit 03 perished." www.NewMediaPerspective.com |
| |
10-23-2008, 02:33 AM
|
#10 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 2,405
Country: | Did the F-14D incorporate a fly-by-wire system?
And when was FBW introduced on the F-15?
How do the control systems compare to those of the F-16? |
| |
10-23-2008, 07:29 AM
|
#11 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,122
| How about we take a look at the thrust to weight and aerodynamic properties of the a/c.
The key point is that you imagine a match up, the a/c facing each other in combat.
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland |
| |
10-23-2008, 07:34 AM
|
#12 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,823
Country: | The problem is all 3 aircraft have varying roles and if flown properly should never see each other in close quarters.
F-15 for me.
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" |
| |
10-23-2008, 08:10 AM
|
#13 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,122
| Well in war different type a/c meet each other all the time, regardless if their flown properly or not
Let me create a scenario:
Two bombers escorted by two F-15's are about to be intercepted by two F-14's fitted with 6x sidewinders and 2x Phoenix missiles.
At 80km away the Tomcats lock on to the bombers and fire off their two Phoenix missiles at them. The F-15's, armed with 8x AIM-7 Sparrow missiles peel off to intercept the Tomcats. The Bombers try to avoid the Phoenix missiles by the help of ECM.
The F-14's & F-15's get within 20km, a wild dogfight is soon to follow, who wins ? Or should I say who have the odds with or against them ?
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland |
| |
10-23-2008, 09:49 AM
|
#14 | | Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5,122
| Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt308 Wow. Rather a silly discussion isn't it? Without some operational context, mission need and order of battle this quickly will blur into a debate about "top speed", "range" and "best load-out".
I'll pass. | You're right, and so I added the scenario for ou guys to think about.
__________________ We have built a total of about 1250 of this aircraft (Me-262), but only fifty were allowed to be used as fighters - as interceptors. And out of this fifty, there were never more than 25 operational. So we had only a very, very few.
- Adolf Galland |
| |
10-23-2008, 10:21 AM
|
#15 | | IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO
Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 13,823
Country: | Quote:
Originally Posted by Soren
The F-14's & F-15's get within 20km, a wild dogfight is soon to follow, who wins ? Or should I say who have the odds with or against them ? | Providing that the F-14s didn't get splashed first by the Sparrows, I'd go with the F-15s, but this will depend on who got their missiles off first and who had the better ECMs to counter the missiles. I do know in exercises conducted between the USAF and the USN the F-15s did come out on top most of the time in simulated combat scenarios. If I remember correctly in 1998 USAF F-15s shot down F-14s 3 to 1 during RIMPAC.
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" |
| | | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:48 AM. |  | |