F-15 vs. F-16 vs. F-22

[feralmerril]

Parts of the job was interesting. Sometimes I got to hear the test pilots talking to the engineers on the radio while going through maneuvers etc.
Also the companys might have the competiters do certain tests on the other`s planes. For instance Lockheed did the shake test on Northrups B-2 and I was a guard on that too. They had it in one of our hangers at palmdale. Also saw it fly. Now THAT gave me goose bumps. At Edwards AF base the hanger for the Northrop YF-23A "Black Widow II" was in the next hanger to ours. Seen that fly too. Our test pilots and engineers were friends with each other. I was stationed at edwards for the fly offs to see which plane got the contract.

 

[Texas Star]

When I worked at McDonnell Douglas (later Boeing) for the government I worked the F-15 center fuselage and final assembly part of the line. Final assembly's hangar door opened out to Lambert International and the test/acceptance flights would take off from there. Lambert's air traffic control responsibility topped out at 10,000 feet so all of the F-15s requested a "Viking departure" which was straight up on afterburners. An F-15 can hit 10,000 feet in less than 30 seconds.

Before I worked for the government I drove a courtesy airport shuttle for a hotel. One day I was taking a German guy to the airport. The ramp onto I-70 was right in line with the runway. Just then an F-15 did a Viking departure and the German dude said, "Mein Gott, you Amerikans haff rockets at your airports!?"

A good account!

When I was in the USAF, I saw our B-52's lumber skywards in a leisurely manner. Then, I was at Goose Bay AFB, Labrador. Half the base was ours; half was an RAF Vulcan heavy bomber wing. This was in Canada, but no RCAF presence, as far as I know, just US and UK. (??) I was just there briefly to process out of the service and don't know a lot about that base.

I saw a Vulcan launch itself off the runway and immediately go nose up and fast. It was quite a sight. I'd seen fighters do that, but not a huge bomber.

I suspect that they did that partly for thrills and partly to be sure they got aloft if our radar warned that Soviet attackers were en route. Our fighters based there often had to respond to approaching Soviet aircraft and warn them off.
We never knew when an intrusion might be for real. The fighters were F-106's.

Hmmm... both the F-106's and the Vulcans were delta-winged planes, now that I think of it. Just a coincidence, of course.

 

[shouldazagged]

The F-22 pilots made themselves rather unpopular at Nellis by describing fighting the F-15 as "clubbing baby seals".

That is colder than a parole officer's smile.

 

[Texas Star]

I talked to a F-15 pilot at an air show years ago. He had previously flown F-4 Phantoms. He said the Eagle was far more maneuverable.

The F-4 was a difficult item in air-to-air combat, enemy Mig-21's being much easier to turn.

I don't think that either the US or the Israelis have ever lost an F-15 to enemy aircraft. Indeed, most enemies have avoided combat with them. Libyans who took on USN F-14's regretted it.

Lest we be too smug, what an Arab pilot would chance and what a top Russian pilot might do are different matters. I think the Russians would be much more dangerous opponents.

Someone here recently mentioned the FW-190 series and the later TA-152 evolution of it. RN test pilot and combat veteran Eric Brown flew about all Allied and Axis fighters after WW II and had very high respect for the FW-190, saying that in particular, it rolled better than a Spitfire, although it couldn't turn quite as tightly. Brown once fought a very skilled German pilot over France. The German had a FW-190 and Brown was in an RAF Spitfire MK IX. They were evenly matched and the German was predictably better in the vertical maneuvers and Brown better in lateral turns. They finally broke off combat, neither able to score on the other. Brown was deeply impressed.

When the Focke-Wulf appeared in 1941, it gave the MK V Spit heck until the MK IX could be created on an emergency basis. It actually was rushed into production before the MK VIII, which was being developed. The advanced MK VIII was later used mainly in Italy and the Far East. It had no trouble dealing with the vaunted Zero.

Brown also admired the Mustang, saying that the Mustang IV (RAF term for their P-51D's) was an excellent plane, with a long range. But if he had to choose a plane to survive in a dogfight, he preferred the Spitfire MK XIV. He felt that it was the most deadly fighter of its day. It appeared over Europe in early 1944.

 

[Kanewpadle]

The F-22 may be a fine aircraft. But I wonder if it can fly with one wing missing?

If you're not familiar with the story....... An Israeli F-15 pilot was involved in a midair collision which took the ring wing clean off at the wing root.

He flew back to base and landed safely!

 

[MK]

Dunno too much about the F-22. But I've been kinda partial
to the F/A 18 in the artificial world the last 3-4 or so years.
I used to have a fairly decent F-16 rigged up, and I like that
plane with it's birds eye view. But then I changed to a later SP
of simulator, and the F-16 I used to use wouldn't run too well.
So I switched to the F/A 18 which was in Acceleration. But the
one I'm using has been heavily tweaked with several mods.
New more realistic HUD, better flight model, etc, etc.
I run the 737's most of the time, but it's a nice change of pace to
run around the block a few times in the artificial F/A 18.
I just got through upgrading the HUD glass the other day. More of a
realistic rose color as usually in real life.
Have several versions.. IE: several Navy, Marines, two NASA versions,
one with the usual astronaut paint, and the other with the HARV paint.
"high alpha research vehicle" I think is what it stands for..
A spin around Ellington, which is next door to JSC.
I do one running start blast off to about 22,000, and also a high alpha
fly by before heading back to the barn.
A hoot to fly, even if fake..
It's 720p HD, but you might have to watch it on u-toob to see it that
res and to go full screen.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhOW5eHh2rU&feature=youtu.be&noredirect=1

 

[zzzippper]

The F-22 may be a fine aircraft. But I wonder if it can fly with one wing missing?

If you're not familiar with the story....... An Israeli F-15 pilot was involved in a midair collision which took the ring wing clean off at the wing root.

He flew back to base and landed safely!

He was also in hot water because he had been ordered to eject and he didn't. The Israelis value their pilots very highly. He also could not have done it without the onboard computer but still a ballsy move.

The Israeli F-15s that we delivered to them went straight into a hangar and don't go into service until over 300 mods are done to them, including bolting a 300 lb stiffener to the speed brake.

On the other hand, F-16s cannot fly straight and normal without the OB computers, they are intentionally unstable to make them more manuverable.

 

[finesse_r]

How soon before our government provides the technology to China in the spirit of Globalism and equalism.

 

[Jessie]

Reference your header (Vs.), I would rate the F22 as tops followed by the F16 then the F15 in a dog fight.
A close friend with a lot of F16 time told me they would go heads up with anything ( including the F18 ) until the F22 came along.
He said it would probably kick his arse.

 

[cass]

He was also in hot water because he had been ordered to eject and he didn't. The Israelis value their pilots very highly. He also could not have done it without the onboard computer but still a ballsy move.

The Israeli F-15s that we delivered to them went straight into a hangar and don't go into service until over 300 mods are done to them, including bolting a 300 lb stiffener to the speed brake.

On the other hand, F-16s cannot fly straight and normal without the OB computers, they are intentionally unstable to make them more manuverable.

Yep, when we delivered new F-16's to the Israeli AF, they were delivered with many empty electronic bays. During assembly, we installed their supplied wiring harnesses for those vacant bays. They also manufactured their own lower wing skins, as ours couldn't withstand the torture that their pilots love to do. To see them fly, always gave me cold chills.

 

[BigBill]

Drones are the new warfare there the plastic pistols of the sky. The fighter pilots will stay on the ground soon.

 

[RonJ]

TexasStar, go and check the F4/Mig kill ratio in Viet Nam. Again it falls back to the better pilot...and to the addition of a gun on the F4.

 

[zzzippper]

I talked to a F-15 pilot at an air show years ago. He had previously flown F-4 Phantoms. He said the Eagle was far more maneuverable.

Someone here recently mentioned the FW-190 series and the later TA-152 evolution of it. RN test pilot and combat veteran Eric Brown flew about all Allied and Axis fighters after WW II and had very high respect for the FW-190, saying that in particular, it rolled better than a Spitfire, although it couldn't turn quite as tightly. Brown once fought a very skilled German pilot over France. The German had a FW-190 and Brown was in an RAF Spitfire MK IX. They were evenly matched and the German was predictably better in the vertical maneuvers and Brown better in lateral turns. They finally broke off combat, neither able to score on the other. Brown was deeply impressed.

When the Focke-Wulf appeared in 1941, it gave the MK V Spit heck until the MK IX could be created on an emergency basis. It actually was rushed into production before the MK VIII, which was being developed. The advanced MK VIII was later used mainly in Italy and the Far East. It had no trouble dealing with the vaunted Zero.

The Fw-190A had the Brits in such a panic that they had plans for a raid in France to steal one.

I read an article by an F-4 pilot with hundreds of hours and then converted to the F-15. He said he was a better pilot in the F-15 after only seven hours in the cockpit.

The F-4 was much bigger and easier to spot than the MiG-21 and its engines smoked like a hookah. If it wasn't leaking hydraulic fluid on the ground that meant it was empty.

 

[Quick10]

With the F-15's upgraded avionics that it's been receiving over the last few years. The F-22 is no longer as dominent over the F-15. I'm not saying the F-15 is better now, just that it can hold it's own with the F-22.

 

[LVSteve]

The Fw-190A had the Brits in such a panic that they had plans for a raid in France to steal one.

Then a young pilot got lost and landed one at RAF Pembrey! He wasn't the last one to do it, either.

No. 1426 Flight RAF - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dave_n]

There is a lovely story (as an ex-Limey I can appreciate it), about B52s and English Electric Lightnings. There used to be a competition between the USAF and the RAF on interceptions between fighters and bombers with each AF taking turns to be bomber or fighter. One time, B52s at max altitude (35K ft plus) thought they were quite safe as they would be able to see any incoming fighter as it climbed to their altitude. Suddenly they were bounced from below by the EE Lightning. These had a climb rate of 50K feet per minute but an absolute range of less than 200 miles out and back in the early versions. Effectively a pilot riding above two jet engines mounted in a figure of 8. As far as I know the only fighter ever to use that plan form. Dave_n

 

[Rastoff]

It's fun listening to all these stories. Especially considering where I work. There aren't too many large aircraft built since 1990 that I haven't seen very early in their development.

The F-22 made it's first flight in Sept 1997. That is long after the Gulf War was over. It didn't formally enter service until 2005.

Comparing these three aircraft to each other isn't really fair. Each has a different mission. They keep trying to extend the life of the F-16 by making it do bomber like missions. It's not well suited to that.

The F-35 (still in development testing at Edwards) is intended to replace the F-16. It won't because it's too expensive. Same with the F-22.

We have screwed ourselves with technology. These new planes are so expensive, we can't replace the old ones. Trust me, F-15s, F-16s and F-18s will be here for many years yet. We can't afford to get rid of them.

We are currently buying new radars for the F-16.

 

[feralmerril]

Rastoff, forgive me for not being real, real accurate. The F-22 was developed from the YF-22. Lockheed won the fly off contract 23 april 1991 after a 90 day competion against northrupts YF 23. The part of the gulf war I was talking about was 24 feb 1991. Was at work that night at edwards when it fired up. The later developed F-22 was right off our YF-22 test bed. Yes, I should have said YF-22 instead of generalizing and saying F-22. I was there for its first flight and most of the testing after that, not only edwards but elsewhere.
http://www.ask.com/wiki/Lockheed_YF-22?o=2800&qsrc=999&ad=doubleDown&an=apn&ap=ask.com

 

[kingfhb]

A couple of things after skimming all the posts...

If there's one thing I've learned from pilots over the years... They're partial to their first aircraft, and they are very partial to the aircraft they are currently or just retired from flying. In other words, an F/A-18 guy is going to say they love that bird... An F-15 guy is going to say that love that bird... Etc etc etc. It's weird, but it exists across all branches and all forms (rotary or fixed wing). I think as long as they get to fly... They're happy.

The ban on BVR firing was defeated when the implemented BVR cameras on fighters... Namely the F-14 as the AGM-65 (phoenix) was capable of firing BVR with it's internal radar package and long range. The BVR cameras exploited a loop hole in the restriction that was vague... Using the cameras the pilots could "see" the aircraft beyond visual range prior to firing.

Each of these aircraft have unique capabilities. Though unless you're part of the exercises and see the outcomes yourself, every pilot that participates tells his crew that they went against the other aircraft and won.

It looks to me that they have started moving away from the cut edge stealth appearance like the F-117 and F-22 with the new F-35. Relying on more of an "electronic" stealth than physical.

They've also seem to be reverting back from dual engines to single again.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LVSteve]

Rastoff, forgive me for not being real, real accurate. The F-22 was developed from the YF-22. Lockheed won the fly off contract 23 april 1991 after a 90 day competion against northrupts YF 23. The part of the gulf war I was talking about was 24 feb 1991. Was at work that night at edwards when it fired up. The later developed F-22 was right off our YF-22 test bed. Yes, I should have said YF-22 instead of generalizing and saying F-22. I was there for its first flight and most of the testing after that, not only edwards but elsewhere.
Lockheed YF-22 - Ask.com Encyclopedia

By the time Lockheed were done with "development", they had an almost completely different airplane. Check out pictures of the YF-22 and compare them to an operational F-22 and you'll see what I mean.

They should have picked the YF-23 because it was prettier. Spitfire fighter theory; "if it looks right, it probably is right".