Sex, drugs, gifts uncovered in government oil probe

SUBMAN1 · 09-11-08, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Hmm...let's see.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

[The YF-17 was actually was inferior from a maneuverability standpoint (The top priority was dogfighting for the competition)

F-16: 26,500 lb loaded, Wing Area 300 sq ft = 98 lb/sq ft.
F-17: 23,000 lb loaded, Wing Area 350 sq ft = 68 lb/sq ft.

Lower wing loading = tighter turn radius.

Quote:

under-powered

F-16: 26,500 lb loaded, Thrust with AB 28,600 lbf = Thrust/Weight 1.079 Declared T/W 1.095
F-17: 23,000 lb loaded, Thrust with AB 28,800 lbf = T/W 1.25 Declared T/W 1.25

Higher T/W = more power for F-17 either way you look at it.

Quote:

and more expensive.

Can't argue that.

Quote:

This quote comes from a disgruntled Northrup employee is all.

Or one with a sense of humor about the situation. Or there is a bit of truth involved. I'm glad you know him so much better to make that statement with confidence. I was just sharing a joke.

Quote:

The Navy took it due to its wants of dual engines for carrier ops, redesigned it to have a better powerplant, and redesignated it the F/A-18. Still to this day, the F-16 is the better dogfighter.

They also increased the size and the loaded weight to 37,000 pounds! I don't question the F-16's ability to out-turn, out-climb and out-dogfight that.

You need to redo this entire thing. Turn radius is not also the sole provider of manuverability. Degrees per second if much more important. Also, where did you come up with 1.25:1 thrust ratio? That is pretty funny! As i understand it, both competitors had less than 1:1 thrust ratio. Only an F-15 at the time had a greater than 1:1 in those days.

-S