Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How To Win In A Dogfight: Stories From A Pilot Who Flew F-16s And MiGs

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How To Win In A Dogfight: Stories From A Pilot Who Flew F-16s And MiGs

    How To Win In A Dogfight: Stories From A Pilot Who Flew F-16s And MiGs


    Here is a report straight from the pilot who flew F-15's, F-16's, F-5's, & Mig 29's. This is really interesting and I learned many things even though I have studied these aircraft for decades.

    When asked about the new F-35:

    Question:Will the F-35's sensor fusion and low observability (stealth) allow it to overcome its lackluster maneuverability and kinetic performance against future enemies?

    His answer: I can't answer this one. I can ask, "Why did they make it such a pig?"

    The F-35 is not a good aircraft and Obama has put all of our eggs in that basket. Obama shut down production of the F-22 which was widely regarded as the best fighter in the world by far. The man is simply a traitor to the US.

    http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/how...lew-1682723379

  • #2
    Thanks for the article, Lou. A few quotables...

    "Accelerating straight up? That's a myth. First off, the old coal-burning Pratt F100-100 proved troublesome. When the throttles were pushed into afterburner you weren't 100% sure if the flame would come out of the back end or the front end. Sometimes, it came out of both ends. I've flown a twin-engine glider, meaning that both engines, while still operating but producing no thrust, as they had stalled. I had maybe 30 hours in the jet at that point. While the Pratt F100-220 in the F-15C is more trouble free, it only produces about 23,500 pounds of thrust. Installed thrust-to-weight is slightly less than 1:1 with eight missiles and no external fuel. If you point the jet straight up and start climbing thrust starts to fall off as the air's density starts to decrease. Weight is not decreasing, as fuel is burned off faster than thrust is decreasing. So stop it everyone there's no accelerating going straight up in the F-15."

    "While I said that the F-15 is like a Mercedes, The F-16 is like a Formula One race car. The cockpit is tight and it gives you more of the sensation that you're actually wearing the jet than actually sitting in it. The side-stick controller takes about as much time to get used to as it takes to read this sentence."

    "My game plan would be not to slow down too much in the F-16. ... Slow is not a place to be in the F-16 unless absolutely necessary. ... What you really don't want to be is the MiG pilot who faces off against either jet [F-15C, F-16C] in this scenario."

    I'm about halfway through the article. Taking a break.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Baruch View Post
      Thanks for the article, Lou. A few quotables...

      "Accelerating straight up? That's a myth. First off, the old coal-burning Pratt F100-100 proved troublesome. When the throttles were pushed into afterburner you weren't 100% sure if the flame would come out of the back end or the front end. Sometimes, it came out of both ends. I've flown a twin-engine glider, meaning that both engines, while still operating but producing no thrust, as they had stalled. I had maybe 30 hours in the jet at that point. While the Pratt F100-220 in the F-15C is more trouble free, it only produces about 23,500 pounds of thrust. Installed thrust-to-weight is slightly less than 1:1 with eight missiles and no external fuel. If you point the jet straight up and start climbing thrust starts to fall off as the air's density starts to decrease. Weight is not decreasing, as fuel is burned off faster than thrust is decreasing. So stop it everyone – there's no accelerating going straight up in the F-15."

      "While I said that the F-15 is like a Mercedes, The F-16 is like a Formula One race car. The cockpit is tight and it gives you more of the sensation that you're actually wearing the jet than actually sitting in it. The side-stick controller takes about as much time to get used to as it takes to read this sentence."

      "My game plan would be not to slow down too much in the F-16. ... Slow is not a place to be in the F-16 unless absolutely necessary. ... What you really don't want to be is the MiG pilot who faces off against either jet [F-15C, F-16C] in this scenario."

      I'm about halfway through the article. Taking a break.

      Glad you are finding it interesting.

      The F 16 is listed as far slower then the 15, but he says there are not much difference in top speed of them.

      He said he has flown the F 16 at Mach 2.05 and the F 15 at mach 2.35.

      Further says this about the F 16:

      I've never flown a jet that will out accelerate the GE-powered F-16.

      In other articles that I have read about foreign exchange pilots, the F 16 is the one that they always want to fly.

      Last edited by Lou Newton; November 1, 2015, 05:31 PM.

      Comment

      Working...
      X