MrGoldfinger
RM
Heinkel He 100 and... offcourse F-4 Phantom!!!
Top 10 Fighter Planes of All Time
- Thread starter El Justo
- Start date
Omega124
Challenging Fate
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
This.
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
My criteria; The aircraft of any particular time period that, if I were in any other aircraft of the time, I would not want to face in combat.
One aircraft stands out above all others.
F/A-22 Raptor (Current): In simulated combat conditions, one Raptor went up against five F-15C Eagles. The Eagles were all shot down without ever having seen or detected the Raptor. There is nothing else like it in the world. This aircraft dominates its competition like no other aircraft in history.
Honorable mentions;
Me-262 (1944): It was the first operational jet aircraft and when introduced, there was nothing like it. None of the conventional fighter aircraft of the time came close. In the hands of an equally skilled pilot, the Me-262 was the superior aircraft. It was close, but I couldn't quite give it the nod due to the poor quality of German pilots by this point in the war. The combat range of this aircraft also held it back. You didn't have to shoot it down. You just had to wait about ten minutes.
MiG-15 (1950): At the start of the Korean War, the MiG-15 made its combat debut by wiping the floor with existing allied models hastening the introduction of the F-86 Sabre, which would first see combat against the MiG-15 in December of 1950. They were not employed effectively enough, but I'd still hate to come up against one, at that time.
F-14 Tomcat (1974): When introduced, the F-14 Tomcat had no equal. I don't think that the MiG-23, MiG-25, or the Su-11 were any match whatever. It was a superior aircraft for the time, with superior quality and performance in every area possible, and would still remain among the elite aircraft of the world today, if it were still employed.
A6M Zero (1941): At the start of the Pacific War, there was nothing in theater that could match it. However, with the introduction of the F-4F Wildcat and "Thatch Weave" tactics, plus several critical design flaws of the Zero, losses were mounting for the Japanese aircraft throughout the remainder of the war.
One aircraft stands out above all others.
F/A-22 Raptor (Current): In simulated combat conditions, one Raptor went up against five F-15C Eagles. The Eagles were all shot down without ever having seen or detected the Raptor. There is nothing else like it in the world. This aircraft dominates its competition like no other aircraft in history.
Honorable mentions;
Me-262 (1944): It was the first operational jet aircraft and when introduced, there was nothing like it. None of the conventional fighter aircraft of the time came close. In the hands of an equally skilled pilot, the Me-262 was the superior aircraft. It was close, but I couldn't quite give it the nod due to the poor quality of German pilots by this point in the war. The combat range of this aircraft also held it back. You didn't have to shoot it down. You just had to wait about ten minutes.
MiG-15 (1950): At the start of the Korean War, the MiG-15 made its combat debut by wiping the floor with existing allied models hastening the introduction of the F-86 Sabre, which would first see combat against the MiG-15 in December of 1950. They were not employed effectively enough, but I'd still hate to come up against one, at that time.
F-14 Tomcat (1974): When introduced, the F-14 Tomcat had no equal. I don't think that the MiG-23, MiG-25, or the Su-11 were any match whatever. It was a superior aircraft for the time, with superior quality and performance in every area possible, and would still remain among the elite aircraft of the world today, if it were still employed.
A6M Zero (1941): At the start of the Pacific War, there was nothing in theater that could match it. However, with the introduction of the F-4F Wildcat and "Thatch Weave" tactics, plus several critical design flaws of the Zero, losses were mounting for the Japanese aircraft throughout the remainder of the war.
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
I would agree if it were not for the fuel-tank design and the type of fuel that the Japanese used. Between that and superior tactics, the US was mopping the floor with the Zero by 1943.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
Type of fuel had more to do with Japanese Industry then aircraft design, however. The thing that amazes me about the Zero is it's versatility. It was a carrier based aircraft that functioned better then any contemporary land based fighter. It was an escort fighter that functioned perfectly well in almost any role, while most escort fighters could barely function passably in their intended role.
The Zero was only "great" until it ran up against the aircraft that entered service in big numbers during the war. Against the prewar designs the superior maneuverability and range made it look really impressive. But that was equalized with tactics by even some US prewar designs. The Zero had a speed or maneuverability or climbing or all advantage with many of those match-ups. But once facing superior speed, the Zero's advantages just were not enough to compensate for the fact that it was about as rugged under fire as a Piper Cub.
It fit a nitch. Once that nitch closed, it wasn't up to the competition.
It fit a nitch. Once that nitch closed, it wasn't up to the competition.
It was in a number of measures better than the aircraft it was up against most of the time before 1943. But that in and of itself isn't the measure of a great aircraft. Even pitted against all the designs in the air in 1940-41, rather than just the ones it actually faced in any numbers, and the story changes. The US was too slow in replacing obsolete planes before the war started. That left us hurting at the start of the war. Didn't take long for us to have better planes in the pipeline.
Bugfatty300
Buddha Squirrel
By the time the better allied fighters had appeared the Japanese had already depleted their elite class of experienced highly trained pilots and all they had left were raw recruits who got very basic and expedited training compared to their American counterparts. I believe this had more to do with the downfall of the Zero than the deficiencies in its design.
US victories relied on skill, tactics and an unending supply of consistently well trained (yet expendable) pilots rather than superior machines.
US victories relied on skill, tactics and an unending supply of consistently well trained (yet expendable) pilots rather than superior machines.
Dragonlord
Fantasy Warlord
While true on average, the pilots in the Me-262 were anything but poor quality - they were mostly aces specifically collected from other units.
True about the combat range, though - hardly any Me262 were actually shot down in combat... they were shot while landing or destroyed on the ground. The engines needed a lot of scarce special fuel, and the Jumo engines were only good for a few hours before needing replacement.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
I think that of two identical pilots, one in an F-14 and one in a MiG-23, the two would probably break even. The Floggers were excellent aircraft, and them being able to outperform an F-16 leads me to believe they could outperform an F-14 too.
As for the last claim, about the Tomcat's superiority today, this is false. The Tomcat was retired because of its aging systems. Its hydraulics systems are a wreck and outdated by fly-by-wire control, and the main reason for the Tomcat's very existence, as a mobile platform for the AIM-60 anti-ballistic missile, is gone, the Phoenix having been retired some years ago. The cost of maintaining them was so much greater than an F-18, which is why the Navy switched over to them in full.
I mean, I love the F-14 as much as any other tits-machine geek, but the thing was past its prime, and needed to be put out to pasture.
From what I was reading, it was tactics more than hardware that made the difference. The Zero was optimal for a type of combat evolved in WWI. Tight close in maneuvering at low to medium speeds. When fighting like this, the Zero was superior even to the Spitfire. However, that was simply not the forms of combat that any other nation's fighters were best at. And the success of the Zero owes as much to the fact that it was up against pilots who were using the wrong tactics for their aircraft design as anything else. Once opposing pilots ceased to fly by the Zero's rules, the Zero stopped being dominant. Even the Curtis P-40 and the Grumman F4F were a match for the Zero when they was used in the tactics that best suited the aircraft's abilities.
Tarquelne
Follower of Tytalus
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2001
- Messages
- 3,718
That's a great summary of what I've read on the subject.
*********
As to the list, I'm disappointed with the criteria:
Hard to get more subjective than "fear factor".
"Fire power" doesn't matter compared to the overall performance or results.
"Kill ratio" leaves out factors like opposition (though it is pretty good).
"Innovation" is pure technophilia - at least it's explicit.
"Service length" could easily have more to do with economics, or politics, or a host of other factors than the plane itself.
Characteristics like reliability, flexibility, and survivability would seem much more to the point when evaluating warplanes.
Such a change to the criteria would also probably put my favorite plane, the P-38, in the top 10.
But that's just a coincidence.
Ahovking
Cyber Nations
Supermarine Spitfire
JohnRM
Don't make me destroy you
Early in the war, the Spitfire was outclassed by the Me-109.
r16
not deity
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 12,148
sorry but this seems to be some propaganda claim with an examination of the specs generally published . As RAF started using higher octane fuel , the horsepower of Spit must gone up to 1350 or so , from 1075 .Bill Gunston says at the time of Battle of Britain even the Hurricane was on par with the ME-109 if had the right fuel .
The Spitfire definitly wins in terms of 'reputation' if not fear factor. I don't think any fighter - maybe not any vehicle, short of the model T for the USA - has ever been such a symbol of its home country. That and they're beautiful things, and they were pretty effective combat aircraft.
