what is the best jet fighter in the world

[Penguin]

Why wasting time when the F-14 can't even hold a finger to the F-15

lie

F-14 Tomcat operational history - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Yzd Khalifa]

lie

F-14 Tomcat operational history - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If it were the other way around, then the US might have retired the F-15s much earlier than now.

 

[Penguin]

McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If it were the other way around, then the US might have retired the F-15s much earlier than now.

Compared to its U.S. Air Force counterpart, the F-15, there were greater limitations on the use of beyond visual range missiles for the F-14 during Desert Storm. This was the result of the U.S. Navy not having developed the systems and procedures required to integrate its carrier air groups into a joint air component command, as Cold War-era tactics had the Navy operating on its own. Navy fighters were not able to solve the strict rules of engagement (ROE) using most of their on-board sensors and relied on outside clearance such as U.S. Air Force E=3 Sentries to receive permission to fire. In contrast, U.S. Air Force F-15s had the systems necessary to independently identify enemy aircraft from beyond visual range and were given the primary overland combat air patrol stations to intercept Iraqi aircraft that made it into the air.

Political reasons have also been attributed to limiting aerial engagements involving F-14s during the Gulf War. According to accounts from Navy pilots, Navy fighters were called off from Iraqi aircraft so that other coalition fighters could engage them. One event used to support this notion occurred on 24 January 1991, when a U.S. Air force E-3 Sentry did not inform U.S. naval units of a pair of Iraqi Mrage F-1EQs that flew into the Persian Gulf. Saudi F-15s were vectored instead of F-14s that were in a better position to shoot down the Iraqi fighters. Another explanation for why the F-14s did not intercept the Mirage F-1s stems from some of the procedural and technical difficulties U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy assets had in passing tactical information to each other. The E-3 could not directly contact the F-14s in a timely manner since they were under the control of the USS Wordon (CG-18), which was not able to get a clear radar picture to accurately vector the F-14s.

Tomcat aircrews that encountered Iraqi fighters found that the Iraqis would disengage and flee once tracked by the F-14's radar and pursued.

Doesn't sound like inherent trouble or inferiority with the F-14 design relative to F-15, IMHO. Besides, to an extent, it is comparing apples and oranges, as USAF requirements were different from USN requirements and hence two different aircraft were developed in the first place > a lighter single seat fixed wing all-weather tactical fighter and a heavier, two-seater swing wing interceptor, for air superiority > see your own wiki

The F-15 is designed as air superiority fighter (not a pound for air to ground) and is meant to perform at 30k+ feet and mach 0.9. No other plane stands a chance against it in that domain except the Flanker series. The F-14 on the other hand has the heart of its envelope much lower and much faster. In fact the primary role of the F-14 was to provide fleet defense against incoming bombers and missiles. That doesn't mean the F-14 can't do air superiority or the F-15 can't do CAP but the point is they are each better in their respective domains, ie at what they were intended to do for the USAF/USN.

The F-15E is probably more maneuverable than any F-14 model: it has a higher G-limit, more powerful engines, a lighter empty weight, and a higher rate of climb. It's empty weight is only slightly heavier than the F-15C. If both planes are fully-loaded (not good for maneuvering), then the F-15E and F-14D would have comparable thrust-to-weight ratios. With the wings fully unswept, the F-14 may have better low speed maneuverability than the F-15E.

F-14 vs F-15 - Difference and Comparison | Diffen
The Aviationist » There was a time when the F-14 Tomcat was better at bombing Iraqi ground targets than the F-15E Strike Eagle

Moreoften than not, retirement dates are governmed by financial and budget matters, more than by capability. D-model Tomcats weapons systems were brought into the digital age with the APG-71 radar, IRST (Infrared Search and Track System), and ability to carry the LANTIRN pods, enabling them to perform strike duties. Finally they got new GE-F110 engines which improved performance across the envelope. However, just when the Tomcat's got their claws sharpened, the shirts and ties on the hill killed the D-model program, with only about three or four squadrons receiving them, effectively numbering the cats' days aboard the boat in favor of the F-18E/F Super Hornet.

 

[kaykay]

1. F-22.
2. Su-35.
3.Typhoon/Rafale/F-15SE/Su-30MKI/J-11B(Once all get AESA).
4. J-10B/GripenNG/F-16s/F-18s(Once all get AESA).
5. Rest all according to their avonics and specification.

 

[Akasa]

P-51 was best only in its specific role - escorting bombers.


Fighter with 100/0 kill ratio sucks? You enjoy being a clown?

No offense, but using only combat records to judge an aircraft's performance is pretty controversial, especially given the gap of technology that exists between the F-15 and whatever it has downed. Not to say that the F-15 isn't a great air superiority fighter, that is.

1. F-22.
2. Su-35.
3.Typhoon/Rafale/F-15SE/Su-30MKI/J-11B(Once all get AESA).
4. J-10B/GripenNG/F-16s/F-18s(Once all get AESA).
5. Rest all according to their avonics and specification.

All of the aforementioned jets that is claimed to have such radars already have AESA radar. J-15 also will have AESA in later batches while J-16 already does.

 

[kaykay]

No offense, but using only combat records to judge an aircraft's performance is pretty controversial, especially given the gap of technology that exists between the F-15 and whatever it has downed. Not to say that the F-15 isn't a great air superiority fighter, that is.



All of the aforementioned jets that is claimed to have such radars already have AESA radar. J-15 also will have AESA in later batches while J-16 already does.

Thats what I meant. I mean all above are either have already or have planned(Typhoon, MKI etc) in next few years. So once all get AESA, Its more or less but almost equal fight in their respective category(one with better pilot will have an edge).

 

[gambit]

No offense, but using only combat records to judge an aircraft's performance is pretty controversial, especially given the gap of technology that exists between the F-15 and whatever it has downed. Not to say that the F-15 isn't a great air superiority fighter, that is.

And what is that gap? The F-15's first flight was in 1972, only a couple yrs behind the MIG-25, and the F-15 have two combat kills against the MIG-25, Israelis vs Syrians, for example. After WW II, who is going to field a prop job against a jet?

 

[Penguin]

After WW II, who is going to field a prop job against a jet?

See Korean war, one of the last major wars where propeller-powered fighters were used. Meanwhile, when was the last time a jet fighter got into a classic "dog fight"? It's all BVR these days. The propeller-driven aircraft's ability to fly low and slow for long periods is responsible for a rebirth of enthusiasm within the USAF.

 

[gambit]

See Korean war, one of the last major wars where propeller-powered fighters were used. Meanwhile, when was the last time a jet fighter got into a classic "dog fight"? It's all BVR these days. The propeller-driven aircraft's ability to fly low and slow for long periods is responsible for a rebirth of enthusiasm within the USAF.

Because there was no choice. The Korean War came near immediately after WW II where the major aviation powers still have prop jobbers in their inventories and jets were in limited deployments. The transition was inevitable. Today, either you have jets in your air force or you have no air force.

 

[Penguin]

Because there was no choice. The Korean War came near immediately after WW II where the major aviation powers still have prop jobbers in their inventories and jets were in limited deployments. The transition was inevitable. Today, either you have jets in your air force or you have no air force.

Either you have current jets or you have no air force (I'ld rather not face off with a Su-27 derivative in an older generation jet).

 

[gambit]

Either you have current jets or you have no air force (I'ld rather not face off with a Su-27 derivative in an older generation jet).

The Su-27's first flight was in 1977, hardly more 'advanced' than the F-15.

 

[Secularpakistani]

It,s HAL Tejas

 

[Penguin]

The Su-27's first flight was in 1977, hardly more 'advanced' than the F-15.

Please read what I said: 'su 27 derivative' (most are newer/more advanced than original su-27, much like F-15E is a very different jet from F-15A). I wasn't involving the F-15 or calling it 'older generation'.

If you either one of these against an F-86, F-4 or Mig-15, Mig 23, what do you think are their odds?

In response to "either you have jets in your air force or you have no air force."
OLD jets don't make a good air force, that was my point.

 

[Akasa]

And what is that gap? The F-15's first flight was in 1972, only a couple yrs behind the MIG-25, and the F-15 have two combat kills against the MIG-25, Israelis vs Syrians, for example. After WW II, who is going to field a prop job against a jet?

The MiG-25s and MiG-29s were not upgraded, and by the time they faced off against the Eagles in most of the aforementioned conflicts, their old datalinks, old electronics, antique weaponry, and little network capabilities were a stark contrast against the F-15s that were fitted with newer radars with BVR munitions, new datalinks, and most importantly, new ECM and EW equipment.

 

[KAL-EL]

Forgot to mention the Viper Mark VII