F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18 who's da boss thread.
 

I stumbled across a similar thread in another forum and it got me researching a bit.

The outcome of that thread and many others I,ve found since is that the F-15 is top dog bar none. The F-14 is an unmenouverable missle truck that would get its backside handed to it on a plate in close in dogfighting with any of the three.

The F-16 and F-18 were similar and deadly but not on the F-15's level.

So I dug out books and searched the internet and came to a surprising revelation. The F-14 is not a missle truck after all despite its reputaion that thing could turn and burn with the best of them and run rings around them when things get slow. Especially the up engined D- model.

As one F-15 driver put it, "We aren't afraid of anything but well never get slow with a tomcat!"

Also interesting is that VF-111 on on returning from its last cruise did a 4 on 4 mock engament with some F-15C's short range Guns and sidwinders only. The results were most shocking of all. 1 tomcat killed 4 F-15's splashed!:o

It could have been the pilots that made the difference.

So which bird do you root for?

I've always loved the F14, great lines, fast and much more manouverable than you'd think. Best of all is it's stand off capability. Most targets of the 14 wouldn't even know there was another aircraft near enough to get a hit when they used the AIM-54 Phoenix.

I love the F-18 as well but the lines and swing wing of the 14 did it for me.

All I know is what they look like.
F-14: UGLY!
F-18: UGLY!
F-15: Sweeeeeeet!
F-16: Non-descript, but I saw one of these maneuvering at an airshow recently and I thought it was damn impressive for a 30yo plane.

There's always been something about the hornet for me.

The Tomcat is a lovely bird, I've developed a lot of appreciation for the styling and design of the fighting falcon over the years, but the eagle just doesn't do it for me. I know it's effective, but the lines make it seem more like a big bugger.

I vote for the F-16 itself. It is by far the most versetile, has the largest payload to weight ratio (I think it still beats the F-18), I think it beats them in power to weight as well (but not 100% sure on that). Oh and can and usually does make mincemeat out of the F15 in dogfights. In the last several wars it was also the main workhorse.

In Desert Storm it flew a total of 13,340 sorties, which was more than any other aircraft, and flew every possible type of mission

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-16_Fi...tional_history

The MiG-29...? Sorry. :O:

Anyway, all of these are designed for mostly different purposes, it's hard to compare them like that.

Well when you say F-15 I assume you mean the F-15 Eagle and Not the F-15E Strike Eagle. If so then...

The F/A-18 Hornet. She is the best multirole fighter on the list. She has a higher payload than the F-16. Can buddy tank (something no USAF fighter can do), and carries the highest number of AAMs (10) of the planes listed.

But really the F/A-18 and the F-16 are the only planes it far to compare. The F-15 is an Air Superiority fighter designed to kill other fighters, the F-14 is a Fleet Defense Fighter (a navy way of saying Interceptor) designed to kill missile carrying bombers. The 16 and 18 are the only two multirole fighters on the list.

I'm biased in favor of the Navy, so I love the F-14... But...

The F-15 has 104 kills with no losses. By any fair standard, this makes it the greatest fighter of all time... (Kanye moment) Of all time!

The F-14 has a good combat record, but nowhere near as good as the F-15s.

I wouldn't even consider the 16 or 18... no legs. I would still love to fly the Viper, though.

And as for the MiG-29... The score right now is
F-15: 9, MiG-29: 0.
F-16: 2, MiG-29: 0 (or maybe just 1 to 0)
To it's credit, the MiG-29 does have confirmed kills against a Georgian UAV and some Cessnas. LOL. :haha:

The F-18 is based on the Northrop F-17 Cobra project. The F-16 beat the F-17 for the contract, but I've heard (rumor only, so big dose of salt here) that there may have been some finagling involved, and the F-17 was the better aircraft. The F-18, being navalised, is bigger and heavier than its forbear, so it's not as agile.

My choice:
F-15
F-16
F-18
F-14

Hmmm, I'm going to go for the F-14, because a) someones got to, b) Phoenix and c) It's just an awesome aircraft.

The F-18 though is a very capable bird, as is the F-16. The F-15 is good air to air but probably has found its niche in the Strike role.

Otherwise, MiG-29 :haha:

MiGs and beers were made to be pounded.

It looks awesome, though.

Also, I wouldn't write off the MiG-29 so quickly. Like most ex-Soviet equipment, it has never been in a combat situation against western aircraft where the odds weren't completely one-sided, or with well-trained pilots, or without downgraded export equipment and weapons and so forth. Though the Su-27 and variants of it will probably be more effective than it in modern air combat anyway.

Now that is very debatable...

The F-4 Phantom II, had 147.5 kills in Vietnam Alone. 32 in the Iran Iraq War, and 116.5 by the IAF. That is 296 Kills. Easily the highest of any Post WWII fighter (if the recent research in to the F-86s real win/loss rate is true). Sure its loss rate was higher but it flew in more dangerous airspace.

IIRC, after the fall of the wall, Germany put some MiG-29s up against some F-16s, and the MiGs kicked arse, I can't recall why, but I think it was a A or B, so the MiGs locked on and plucked them from the sky before the F-16 could lock onto the MiG.

There have been a number of other occasions where Luftwaffe MiGs have surprised the west. A bit like the Kontakt-5 ERA on Soviet tanks that Germany inherited from the fall of the wall. They tested M829 APFSDS on it, the depleted uranium sabot, and the ERA stopped it. That then lead to the newer versions of the M829, now on the A3 I think.

So, don't rule them out on an equal footing (ie, like Raptor says, equal training or odds).

Still, F-14s are awesome.

Sorry, but the F-4 could barely handle itself against MiG-17s and -21s in a dogfight. The F-15 has dominated everything it flew against (and so have the -14 and -16, but with far fewer engagements)

The kill ratio is the bottom line for me. I don't care what an aircraft should've/would've/could've done. Especially the MiG claims... the MiGs need to put up or shut up.