Air Force vs. Navy | FerrariChat

Air Force vs. Navy

Discussion in 'Aviation Chat' started by spicedriver, May 31, 2018.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

  1. ralfabco

    ralfabco Two Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa

    Mar 1, 2002
    28,029
    Dixie
    Full Name:
    Itamar Ben-Gvir
    The F-18 is the better platform in a dogfight.
     
  2. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    37,985
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    Than an F-15E compared to an F/A-18E but not an F/A-18F, possibly, but not an F-16C or late F-15C. The F-15E reference was to a 2 seater similar to the F-14A used in the original movie. Remember, too, that all the USAF two seat fighters are dual control so the back seater can fly them, too.

    Incidentally, the F-15 guys called the F-14s Turkeys in the olden days. Easy meat close in.
     
    Boomhauer likes this.
  3. ralfabco

    ralfabco Two Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa

    Mar 1, 2002
    28,029
    Dixie
    Full Name:
    Itamar Ben-Gvir
    #4 ralfabco, May 31, 2018
    Last edited: May 31, 2018
    I imagine the F-14 A+, B, and the D was a different story, in a furball.

    The TF30 demonstrated poor performance and reliability in the F-14A.
     
  4. Smiles

    Smiles F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Nov 20, 2003
    16,601
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Full Name:
    Matt F
    I was sketching F-15s back in the early 80s in grade school.

    It’s amazing that it’s so undefeated yet today. .

    Matt
     
  5. Gatorrari

    Gatorrari F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 27, 2004
    15,924
    Georgia
    Full Name:
    Jim Pernikoff
    Just because the F-15E can go over 1800 MPH is meaningless in a dogfight. The E model is a strike aircraft not designed for dogfighting; that's what the C model is for.

    I think the F-14B or D would be competitive with the F-15 in a dogfight, though not the F-14A, whose engines were not up to the task. (The TF-30 was not originally designed for afterburning.) I'm not sure where the F-18 would compare.
     
  6. Gatorrari

    Gatorrari F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Feb 27, 2004
    15,924
    Georgia
    Full Name:
    Jim Pernikoff
    Note that I will never refer to the Hornet as anything other than the F-18. The stupid "F/A" designation is illegal per DOD standards and should never have been applied. And I'll bet the "/" screws anyone who tries to enter that designation into a computer!
     
    sigar likes this.
  7. Brian Johnson

    Brian Johnson Rookie

    Jul 16, 2018
    10
    Full Name:
    Brian Johnson
    I read somewhere they are having Maverick fly a Hornet rather than the Navy’s newest jet, the F-35, is because it has to be a two seat airplane. He has to have somebody to talk to...

    There are a couple reasons Air Force guys referred to Tomcats as “turkeys”. First of all, have you ever seen a real turkey fly? It has to work pretty hard just to stay airborne...and it’s not very maneuverable. Also, when a turkey’s wings pop out, he’s done!
     
  8. Boomhauer

    Boomhauer Formula Junior

    Aug 18, 2007
    881
    Milano - Italia
    Full Name:
    Cardinal
    Not as bad as the F-15 without wing incident, but it can fly with a damaged wing

    Image Unavailable, Please Login
     
  9. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    37,985
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    That should cheer up the Iranians. All of ours are beer cans now to keep any parts from escaping.

    The one thing the F-14 could do, and so could the F-111F, was out-accelerate anything through the mach. Light the burners, sweep the wings, unload, and nothing contemporary could catch you.
     
    Boomhauer likes this.
  10. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    I posted it before but a Boeing 707-320 lost the outboard wing section just outboard of the number 4 strut shortly after taking off from SFO. Engine disassembly, fire, and strenuous roll inputs by the pilot removed the damaged outboard section of wing and he successfully landed the airplane.
     
  11. Fave

    Fave F1 Rookie

    Aug 12, 2010
    4,157
    Tarana
    Full Name:
    L. Ike Hunt
    I had to look this up and found this posted 15 years ago on airliners.net

    The Pan Am 707 that lost part of it's wing in the mid 60's, after leaving San Francisco enroute to Hawaii, sustained damage so great that Boeing officials later said the 707 was not designed to fly with so much of a wing gone, and they were amazed the jet hadn't crashed.

    The explosion and fire took off the outboard (#4) engine, and then the fire continued to burn away the right wing almost to the inboard engine.

    A Pan Am pilot driving to SFO stopped his car on the Bayshore Highway and took a dramatic photo of the 707 heading out towards the Pacific, streaming flames like a comet.

    Amazingly, the cockpit crew knew they had lost power in the #4 engine, but they did not know the engine had fallen off and that half the wing was burned away. The 707's sweptback wings could not be seen by the flight crew.

    This was long before the advent of CRM (Crew Resource Management), and the cabin crew, busy getting passengers into life jackets, never thought to inform the pilots of the extent of the damage.

    Captain Kimes managed to fly the crippled 707 towards Travis Air Force Base, situated between San Francisco and Sacramento. On final approach, a whirling dust devil was moving across the airfield, and Kimes elected to execute a go-around (!) before safely setting his aircraft on the ground.

    Pan Am was so grateful that they picked up the tab for Captain Mine's son Chuck's college education, bought the Kimes an expensive new car, and showered the family with other gifts.

    Here's a news report about Pan Am 843 with 8mm film recorded by a passenger. They interviewed he husband even though it was he wife doing the filming.... but they let her speak... Got to love the 60's


     
    Bisonte and Sunracer like this.
  12. Fave

    Fave F1 Rookie

    Aug 12, 2010
    4,157
    Tarana
    Full Name:
    L. Ike Hunt
    Ran out of time to edit... But Pan Am sent a 707 to Travis to pick up the passengers, and upon landing it's nose gear collapsed so they had to send another plane... Good day for passengers, bad day for Pan Am
     
  13. Brian Johnson

    Brian Johnson Rookie

    Jul 16, 2018
    10
    Full Name:
    Brian Johnson
    True! Both airplanes were wicked fast in a straight line. By “contemporary” do you mean at the time those airplanes were in service?
     
  14. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    I would like to add some "inside" info about the flight. After the fire had burned enough of the outboard wing structure it became loose enough to become an aileron and started to do just what an aileron is supposed to do.It was beginning to control the airplane so Kime executed several hard rolling inputs and succeeded in twisting the damaged section of wing from the airplane. He still had an inboard aileron and spoilers on the right hand inboard wing that were operable, so , combined with the left wing ailerons and spoilers he had ample roll control. The 707 wing was a five piece structure, two sections of outer wing on each side plus the center section. The effective span of that airplane was about 151 feet measured straight across from tip to tip normal to the centerline of the airplane. Projecting the length of the outboard wing from the point where the panels are joined down to the effective span shows that the amount of wing that was lost is only about 19 percent of the total span and the main lifting element of the inboard wing was still working well and a tank- end rib inboard of the break protected the main fuel tank. I know that this confusing so I'll try to work up a sketch if anyone would need it.
     
  15. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    I was incorrect re wing span, thinking of another design. The span of the 707-320 is 142.5 ft. The span of the outer wing that burned off was about 19 feet so the wing only lost about 13%-14% of the span. A lot of B-17's came back with more damage than that and the more recent fighter incidents were even worse.
     
  16. Ryan S.

    Ryan S. Two Time F1 World Champ
    Silver Subscribed

    Mar 20, 2004
    26,629
    As long as this fear of parts walking away has existed, are there reports of any parts actually escaping?
     
  17. Bob Parks

    Bob Parks F1 Veteran
    Consultant

    Nov 29, 2003
    7,911
    Shoreline,Washington
    Full Name:
    Robert Parks
    One more tidbit. The outboard wing contained 434 gallons of fuel.
     
  18. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    37,985
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    Brian- Contemporary meant all those aircraft the were essentially 3rd or 4th generation fighters like the F-16 and F-15 and overseas equivalents. A drag race with an F-22A would have been a losing proposition. Incidentally, some of the F-111Fs could supercruise at Mach 1.05-1.15. Caused a lot noise complaints, though.

    Ryan- Originally, the Iranians were successful at getting parts through back channels for their F-14As. That was one impetus for chopping up all the F-14s they had at Davis Monthan, and even affected the F-111s, which also used TF-30s. They have still been pretty good at adapting other parts to keep them flying. The Phoenix Fire Control System, originally intended for the F-111B, gave them the most problems, but they managed work-arounds.
     
    Brian Johnson likes this.
  19. Hannibal308

    Hannibal308 F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Jan 3, 2012
    6,270
    Kahuku / Cottonwood / Prescott
    Full Name:
    Will
    I love it when non-fighter pilots compare fighter match-ups. More entertaining than another Top Gun movie!
     
  20. Brian Johnson

    Brian Johnson Rookie

    Jul 16, 2018
    10
    Full Name:
    Brian Johnson
    To which “non-fighter pilot” are you referring?
     
  21. tazandjan

    tazandjan Three Time F1 World Champ
    Lifetime Rossa Owner

    Jul 19, 2008
    37,985
    Clarksville, Tennessee
    Full Name:
    Terry H Phillips
    Some of us non-fighter pilots have quite a bit of cockpit experience in multiple fighter types.
     
  22. joker57676

    joker57676 Two Time F1 World Champ

    Apr 12, 2005
    23,767
    Sin City
    Full Name:
    Deplorie McDeplorableface
    I fly a Cessna. Therefore, I pretty much know everything. :D
     
    Jaguar36 likes this.
  23. Hannibal308

    Hannibal308 F1 Veteran
    Rossa Subscribed

    Jan 3, 2012
    6,270
    Kahuku / Cottonwood / Prescott
    Full Name:
    Will
    I didn't expect anyone in particular to get butt-hurt over my comment. I guess being both an F-16 pilot and a trauma surgeon, brashness is de rigueur. It's just a bit of folly to compare a generic F-15 to a generic F-18 for example, without being specific, as variants of each exist. As you may well know, any single-seat F-18 (A or C) is a very bad-ass fighter. Of the very many fighters I have practiced BFM or ACM (close range work) against in the F-16, the F-18C has given me pause on more than one occasion. I've practiced against, and have also flown both Typhoon and Rafale. Like other canard-delta platforms such as Gripen, these aircraft have their distinct fortés and can have their way with an F-16 (Rafale in particular) if the Viper pilot isn't 100% in the game or makes critical errors. F-15s are very usually a joke to fly against in a "dog fight" (which is a close-in turning fight to employ the gun or a short range capable missile). The F-15E is an outstanding fighter-bomber, but it is heavy and doesn't turn like it's older (and sexier) sister the F-15C, so it doesn't match up well to an F-18 (likely any model, though I admit I don't know for sure). When one brings the discussion to BVR, the whole scenario changes, as both the F-15C and E are very, very good in that regard, and I say, though some would argue with me and call me a traitor, better than the Viper. The F-16C and F-18C are pretty equivalent. Start talking about F-22 and F-35 and these both routinely smoke everything near and far unless gross buffoonery happens on their side. Another important dimension to the entire turning match-up games, without even straying into Soviet stuff, is what HOBS (High Off Boresight) capability is being exploited by each side of the match-up. This latter aspect, along with the stealth dimension, has largely rendered these discussions moot. Hence the (sad) humor in caring what platform Maverick happens to mount for his next odyssey (really silly Air Force twitts notwithstanding).
     
    Formula Uno likes this.
  24. Brian Johnson

    Brian Johnson Rookie

    Jul 16, 2018
    10
    Full Name:
    Brian Johnson
    None of the posts above yours contained any inaccurate information. Your comment implied the previous posts were so ill-informed they were comical. I can't imagine why anyone would take offense to that...

    In which nation's Air Force did you serve?
     
    Jaguar36 and Formula Uno like this.

Share This Page