Ah, the F-4. Built on the principle that, given enough power, even a brick can fly.:DL Always had a soft spot for that bird.

Until I met the F-16C. Who can't love a bird that'll turn on a dime and give you change? Cute bird, at that, with easily the best visibility out of the cockpit AND the smallest profile of the lot - critical in a close in furball.

The multirole aspect is what won me over, though; the F-16 reminded me so much of the Thunderbolt drivers who started war Two as fighters and ended it moving mud - the Falcon is an aircraft that'll do that in an afternoon.

And the F-4 against poorly trained Vietnamese peasants? :O:

I couldn't conjure up those words earlier. Kept thinking of cinderblocks. :haha:

Just my two cents.

On the concept of K/D ratio (for me comparing the F-15 to F-14); think of the following, how many allied nations use the F-15 and have used them in a war against poorly trained pilots and have used it to its full potential. Considering the IAF as well as my main example. We see that it was used in a war which puts it on a more dangerous, target rich environment then a naval fighter will ever encounter.

Now consider the F-14, the only real user of this fighter is the Navy as well as the Iranians. HOWEVER, the US gave the Iranians a finite supply of Pheonixes and NO spare parts to fix/do maintenance. After recent events the US has refused to supply these maintenance and replacement parts to the Phoenix missiles. The weapon that makes the Tomcat so devastating in a bomber interceptor role. Effectively, this makes the USNAF the only true user of the Tomcat at its fullest potential.

Now couple this fact with the issue that the USNAF hasn't been implacated in any large scale naval conflicts requiring bomber interceptions and the K/D ratio becomes, to me, invalid Sure the F-15 may have 100+ kills to no losses, but how many engagements has it had access to with how many targets available? Compare that to the F-14 who's primary role is a Fleet DEFENCE Fighter.

Secondly; to me; the F-14 AND the F-15 win it for me, because the two were developed side by side for two different purpose (F-15 to counter the USSR's MiG-25 Foxbat Interceptor, which was wrongly assumed to be an Mach 3 air superiority fighter; F-14 to give the CVBGs better CAP and BARCAP).

Cheers, correct me on any point you deem wrong and I will attempt to support my arguments with valid sources :)

Krauter

:har:

Actually the latest incarnation of the phoenix missile system can target small aircraft effectively. And the tomcats AWG9 radar is unsurpassed for a fighter even to this day. It was so complex and powerful that Grumman decided to follow the phantom and have a RIO because one man couldn't operate the plane and the radar effectively.

AWG-9 can track and lock up to 14 individual targets at 200+ nautical miles!

With that kind of power you could skip the awacs:rock:

Ohhh... I wish I had the displays of a Typhoon
I'd feel so damn important like a tycoon.
I'd fly all night, into the morn'
Beatin' off and watchin' porn
I wish I had displays like a Typhoon!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrHSBODV0lA

F-14 vs everybody!

Looks like they have a new 5th generation fighter coming up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_PAK_FA

Looks comparable to the F-22 Raptor, at least aesthetically.

My guess is that the Russians will only be able to afford a very small amount of them, and after trying to export them to the Indians and whoever else is willing to try and foot the bill, the design will become stagnant due to lack of funds.

Pretty dang close. She's distinctly Russian, though. :yep:

Oh yes, it's interesting to see how it blends (maybe unintentionally) the lines of the F-22 and the Su-27(37 + number of other modifications).

Yea if you want the more direct F-22 copy you need to go and talk to the Chinese:

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/3...ofchinesej.jpg

LOL that made my day right there...

The Iranians did just that with their F-14 in the Iran/Iraq war. With their P-3s too IIRC.

... and their Soviet/Chinese/North Korean advisers. Vietnam was a multinational war for both sides less we forget.

Also Hanoi had more air defenses than Moscow. Baghdad in 1991 was as heavily defended as a walmat by comparison.

:D
good post, the MiG-29 doesn't have a good record. Maybe the Russians should stop selling thier top hardware to banana republics.

On a side note, I've always wondered how many of those NVA pilots were actually Russians? (like in Korea, just a better kept secret):|\\