Fantastic silhouette of this Japanese F-2 prototype.
Meathook
Posted: Aug 02, 2006 - 09:18 PM
Elite
Joined: May 13, 2004
Posts: 2945
Location: Utah
Thanks... great photos, I can see some differences too, possibly a larger nose section? Looks like a slightly larger wing surface, drag chute (of course)... Mitsubishi involved too..not bad at all
Lieven
Posted: Aug 02, 2006 - 09:24 PM
F-16.net Webmaster
Joined: May 23, 2003
Posts: 2201
Location: Belgium
Also have a look at these threads:
<a href="f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-1165-highlight-f2.html">F-16 vs F-2/FSX</a>
7 February 2003:
F-2B.
JASDF, based at Misawa AB, Aomori Prefecture.
During or after formation flight, while landing, horizontal staibiliser(s) of second aircraft contacted runway, damaged, and replaced.
Because turbulence by first aircraft.
Repair cost: 17 million Yen.
Pilot was JASDF Major. Co-pilot was JASDF Captain.
News announced on 11 January 2007.
12 September 2002:
F-2A.
JASDF, based at Misawa AB, Aomori Prefecture.
During or after formation flight, while landing, horizontal staibiliser(s) of second aircraft contacted runway, damaged, and replaced.
Because turbulence by first aircraft.
Repair cost: 47 million Yen.
Pilot was JASDF Major.
News announced on 11 January 2007.
A frequent comparison I see is that F-2 is to F-16 as Super Hornets (E/F) are to Legacy Hornets (A/B/C/D) due to the larger wings and lengthened fuselages. That's not entirely accurate as SH & LH share a lot of avionics where F-2/F-16 do not. Also, F-2/F-16 share a common engine where SH/LH do not.
_________________ Reality Is For People Who Can't Handle Simulation
gta
Posted: Feb 06, 2007 - 02:25 PM
Newbie
Joined: Feb 03, 2007
Posts: 10
Status: Offline
I think that the F-2 is noting but a "3.25" gen fighter. Because its maneuverability doesn't improve much, compared with normal 3th gen fighters. It has a large wing which is 34% larger than F-16C, and that reduces the wing loading, so the instant turn performance is better. But it's 1300kg heavier, and what's more, the thrust remains the same, so its energy maneuverability drops a lot.
I know that Japanese originally wanted to design something of their own, something new, however I read somewhere that we had something to do with not letting them ...
_________________ U.S. ARMY AH-64D "Armt Dawg"
Though in eternal NARNIA, I'll fly a F-16! Come further in! Come further up!
Monday, 3 September 2007:
F-2.
21st Hikoutai, 4th Koukuudan, JASDF, based at Matsushima AB, Higashi Matsushima City, Miyagi Prefecture.
Afternoon, dumped fuel tank into ocean.
14:48, took off, with another F-2 flown by instructor.
During take off and landing training, fuel tank under fuselage contacted runway.
Fuel tank deformed and could not lower landing gear for landing. Visually checked by wingman.
Dumped fuel tank into ocean, about 70 km east of Kinkazan Mountain, Ishimaki City.
Fuel tank held 1,200 litres, but was consumed and empty.
Safely landed. One pilot not wounded.
4 September, about 10:00, helicopter from Matsushima AB, found fuel tank floating in ocean.
Afternoon, Miyagi Japan Coast Guard patrol ship recovered fuel tank from ocean, about 70 km east of Kinkazan Mountain. Returned to Onagawa Port. Taken by Matsushima AB soldiers.
Joined: Sep 23, 2003
Posts: 2810
Location: Australia
If you keep the F-2 in context to what it replaced, .... the mission of the Mitsubishi F-1 then not such a bad thing. A big leap ahead. The little F-1 was short on everything, endurance, warload etc. Cool little plane though. I was at Misawa right before F-16s showed up.
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Forum Guidelines
