What is (in your opinion) the BEST fighter plane that has EVER served in the Navy / Marine Corps?

[BarrettRC8]

Until the RO started to scream. (and they wanted to be low, too).

I dunno, maybe 100 ft. over the flat rice paddies. We left rooster tails. (They didn't have telephones to worry about).

I bet that scared the hell out of some unsuspecting people out in the rice paddies.

Speaking of the F-4, why do the small motor legacy Hornets have the same amount of thrust? Even with EPE engines, the Hornet still isn't a true Cat IV aircraft.

If I had a wishlist, at the top would be having a couple of motors similar to what the F-16 is putting out - 17k dry, 28k wet. BFM monster.

 

[scoober78]

If I had a wishlist, at the top would be having a couple of motors similar to what the F-16 is putting out - 17k dry, 28k wet. BFM monster.

Yeah...if only they'd come up with something like that...

 

[BarrettRC8]

Yeah...if only they'd come up with something like that...

The Eagle is obviously a great 2 circle fighter, but can anyone attest to its nose authority when compared with the Hornet? I was talking with a previous instructor who had flow the Strike Eagle, and all types of the Hornet - A through F, said he'd take the Hornet without a second thought when WVR. And granted, the Strike Eagle isn't optimized for A/A like the Charlie version, but I'd imagine it'd have similar characteristics.

 

[scoober78]

The Eagle is obviously a great 2 circle fighter, but can anyone attest to its nose authority when compared with the Hornet? I was talking with a previous instructor who had flow the Strike Eagle, and all types of the Hornet - A through F, said he'd take the Hornet without a second thought when WVR. And granted, the Strike Eagle isn't optimized for A/A like the Charlie version, but I'd imagine it'd have similar characteristics.

I was just pointing out (and trying to be amusing) that they made an airplane with X2 F-16 motors...all good questions I don't have the answer to.

I have to wonder though if the extra fuel requirements would make it somewhat less useful than what we have now...Thoughts?

 

[BusyBee604]

I bet that scared the hell out of some unsuspecting people out in the rice paddies.

I doubt that, after the early days in '65, there were no 'unsuspecting people' in the paddies up north. Down to the lowest paddy laborer, women or children...they were well (small) armed, smart, & dangerous. They KNEW which planes could do them harm, and which posed little threat, and took action accordingly. Their shooting was very accurate, even at high speed...especially at the low altitude Cat describes as 'rooster-tailing'.

Fortunately, small arms hits were not usually enough to bring down the jets, except in a few vital spots (pilot, engine compressor, fuel line, etc.). Occasionally causing a systems failure (hydraulic, electric, flt control}, but these could normally make it 'bok sheep'! Big exception was the Vigi. A rifle hit in the wing or fuselage at low alt, super high mach, could result in airframe disintegration due to high pressure/mach airflow in and around the damaged areas.
BzB

 

[BarrettRC8]

I was just pointing out (and trying to be amusing) that they made an airplane with X2 F-16 motors...all good questions I don't have the answer to.

I have to wonder though if the extra fuel requirements would make it somewhat less useful than what we have now...Thoughts?

I honestly have no idea - Although when you consider the fact that the F-16's motor makes the same amount of thrust at MIL that one of ours does at MAX, that has to count for something.

 

[Catmando]

I doubt that, after the early days in '65, there were no 'unsuspecting people' in the paddies up north. Down to the lowest paddy laborer, women or children...they were well (small) armed, smart, & dangerous. They KNEW which planes could do them harm, and which posed little threat, and took action accordingly. Their shooting was very accurate, even at high speed...especially at the low altitude Cat describes as 'rooster-tailing'.

Fortunately, small arms hits were not usually enough to bring down the jets, except in a few vital spots (pilot, engine compressor, fuel line, etc.). Occasionally causing a systems failure (hydraulic, electric, flt control}, but these could normally make it 'bok sheep'! Big exception was the Vigi. A rifle hit in the wing or fuselage at low alt, super high mach, could result in airframe disintegration due to high pressure/mach airflow in and around the damaged areas.
BzB

We often talked a lot about the risks and benefits of various ingress/egress altitudes. Indeed each airwing, if not each squadron had their own different way they operated and thought best. And over the course of the war many tactics and recommended altitudes changed.

Our airwing and especially our F-4s liked to come out screaming and low. We knew every bad guy was laying on his back barrage firing small arms straight upward. We also knew that even a kid could throw a rock up in front of us and do some serious damage. But we figured being that low they couldn't see or hear us coming (supersonic) and that we would be past before they could react. I also felt more comfortable in the weeds than up in the SAM envelope. Besides we wanted to get the hell out of Dodge!

If not over rice paddies, we then moved it up a bit in altitude and hid behind the karst ridges on egress.

Remember we literally went the 'speed of heat' and often well above NATOPS max airpeed limits. In fact many times we would return with our leading edges' paint bubbled and burned from the heat friction.

 

[MasterBates]

Now, you'd be FNAEBd for wantonly exceeding limits

Sent from my PH44100 using Tapatalk 2

 

[usmarinemike]

Now, you'd be FNAEBd for wantonly exceeding limits

Sent from my PH44100 using Tapatalk 2

I would still do it if a threat existed...In a heartbeat. You can loft a JDAM.

 

[Flash]

Now, you'd be FNAEBd for wantonly exceeding limits

Seriously?

I would still do it if a threat existed...In a heartbeat. You can loft a JDAM.

That's the difference. I know guys who did what they needed over Serbia and Kosovo and were decorated for it, not crucified.

 

[BusyBee604]

I would still do it if a threat existed...In a heartbeat...

Damn straight, FNAEBd for exceeding limits 'nevva hoppin' in combat, but even if so, beats hell out of a body bag or Davy Jones' locker!

*Being SEEN much preferred to 'Being VIEWED'!
BzB

 

[Harrier Dude]

I would still do it if a threat existed...In a heartbeat. You can loft a JDAM.

You can loft anything. The system actually works.

CEP varies with ordnance, but you might be surprised the hits you can get lofting dumb bombs from LAT.

Lofting 6 MK76's from 10k in a T-bird........not the greatest idea, though.

 

[Catmando]

Damn straight, FNAEBd for exceeding limits 'nevva hoppin' in combat, but even if so, beats hell out of a body bag or Davy Jones' locker!

*Being SEEN much preferred to 'Being VIEWED'!
BzB

Damn straight, skippy. We all truly believed the axiom : Speed is life!

We worshipped it. CAG included. And we therefore lived...at least most of us did....

 

[Catmando]

I would still do it if a threat existed...In a heartbeat. You can loft a JDAM.

I know a guy who lofted (because he was late) from maybe 10 miles 6 MK-82s that incredibly scored a direct hit! Awesome!

Unfortunately it made international news because of ... perhaps I should say, stuff still secret.

 

[bunk22]

I'm late to the party on this one. Did a cross country to Prescott, Arizona and stopped off for some dinner at the Brewery and had drink after drink bought for us. How the hell did I get back to my hotel? Why was my ass sore...never mind.

Anyway, IMO only, I think F4U Corsair and F-8 Crusader. Now which Naval Aircraft has the best kill ratio? I guess it depends as the Tomcat might be 4-0 against fixed wing but for those with many kills, like the Wildcat and Hellcat of WWII fame. The best kill ratio isn't always the most appropriate as it might be an aircraft that racks up many kills versus poorly flown enemy planes. Anyway, the FM-2 Wildcat has the best kill ratio of any Navy fighter that I know of. I believe it was around 44:1 and 36:1 fighter to fighter. Around 440 kills for 11 losses.