F-16C Block 52/60 vs F-14B/D Bombcat/Super Tomcat

Agreed, it will never be a fair fight but how would the F-16 match up against the ... ?
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

supermarinespitfire

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2008, 03:57

Unread post11 Oct 2008, 04:05

The Electric Jet versus the Navy's legend.
Situations:
-WVR, Sidewinders and guns only.
-Medium range, Sidewinders, Sparrows, AMRAAMs. No Phoenixes.
-BVR, AMRAAMs, Sparrows, Phoenixes
Other things:
-Endurance at CAP
-Maneuverability
-Anything else you can think of


Anytime, baby!
Offline
User avatar

That_Engine_Guy

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2312
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2005, 05:03
  • Location: Under an engine somewhere.

Unread post11 Oct 2008, 16:13

Mute point....
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4545
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post11 Oct 2008, 16:18

WVR- depends on the situation, they may both shoot each other in the face with AIM-9M, F-16 would have the advantage of AIM-9X capability, F-16 will out turn and out climb the Super Tomcat if he is smart. Cat driver will want to get the Falcon below 250 knots, but with the Monster engines Vipers come with that would be tricky.

Medium Range- Definately the F-16 here as the AIM-120 is a vastly superior missile to the AIM-7. Or are we using Vandy 9? (sexiest jet ever)

BVR- The Phoenix will allow EASY first shot unless the AIM-120D is used. However the AIM-54 has proven less than reliable so the Tom gets the first shot but may need multiple followups to keep the Viper busy.

Endurance- Well, the F-14 has a vast fuel supply and better L/Dmax, but is also heavy and has two engines. F-16 is small and has one engine so it depends on the fuel tanks/CFTs used. 20,000 lbs of fuel on the cat with two tanks vs a max of 19,000lbs on an F-16E with CFTs and three externals, although this would give the Viper an atrocious L/Dmax. This one requires a lot more data than I have handy.

Maneuverability- defined how? Stall speed? F-14 Max turn rate? F-16 Roll rate? Viper over 80% of speed range, tied the rest Climb Rate? Viper under low speed conditions.

Anything else I can think of- Raw Sexyness? Tomcat Ruggedness? Tomcat Speed? Tomcat

Viper is a great plane (and my favorite) and I would give various parts of my anatomy to fly one.... But when it comes to what I think the coolest jet is the answer is easy... Grumman's Final Cat, Every Time Baby!
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

supermarinespitfire

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2008, 03:57

Unread post11 Oct 2008, 17:00

Couldn't the Supercat carry the AMRAAM? Plus it's radar is way better for air to air, and has a RIO.
By manueverability, I mean roll rate, corner speed, turn radius, etc
What about the F-14A vs F-16A/B?
Offline

F16guy

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 366
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2004, 14:08

Unread post13 Oct 2008, 07:29

Super-

The best airplane with a mediocre pilot usually won't win against a mediocre plane and a damn good pilot. Just curious, what are you looking for as an answer? Its kind of like trying to compare Jim Brown to Walter Payton to Barry Sanders to Emmitt Smith to.... You get the idea.

If you like one plane more than the other there is very little one can say that will change your opinion. By the way both airplanes are very good at what they were designed to do.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4545
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post15 Oct 2008, 11:49

Spit, the Tomcat was never cleared for the AIM-120 with the sole exception of Vandy 9 IIRC for testing purposes. The program never went through because the Hornet already carried AIM-120. As for the better radar, it is a bit of a mute point when your missile is the limiting factor. As for your maneuverability specifics, I looked up at my post and it wasn't clear what I was trying to say, sorry. Roll rate goes to the F-16 unless the F-14 is at 55deg sweep, then it is a tie. F-16 has no corner speed, it has a corner plateu. Turn radius goes to the Tomcat, but rate goes to the Falcon. Tomcat CAN take both if the pilot feels ballsy and over-Gs the plane, but then he is putting his faith in the Grumman Ironworks to hold the Turkey together. Climb rate goes to the Viper supsonic and it is prolly veary close supersonic. As far as A models, then it is less of a contest as the A model Viper weighed in at around 8 tons with 3.5 tons of fuel and was equipped with 12 tons of thrust, plus the light weight meant it could turn faster/tighter than the C model too. The F-14A was still over 20 tons without its 8 tons of fuel and had merely 20 tons of thrust.

F-16guy, I think it is safe to assume that both planes are to have the best crews they could have. Put Snort or Hoser in the Cat and the F-16, despite all its advantages, will have to brings its A game.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

supermarinespitfire

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2008, 03:57

Unread post25 Oct 2008, 16:37

I don't like the Cat more than the Falcon, I actually love both. I like the Hornet better than the Viper though (Cobra should've won the LWF program!).
Anyways.
The best Cat driver/RIO vs the best Viper pilot is what I'm looking for, each having their respective AWACS aircraft. Plus, for the sake of equality, the Cat is Vandy 9 with AMRAAMs replacing Sparrows, and the AIM-54C.
Other possibles situations include Viper/no AWACS and Cat with AWACS, Cat/no AWACS and Viper with AWACS.
By the way, if the Cat pilot went to Miramar and trained against the Viper, would it help any in a real situation?
Offline

Des

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 63
  • Joined: 09 Nov 2005, 04:52

Unread post27 Oct 2008, 07:33

what's the point of the exercise?
Offline

F16guy

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 366
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2004, 14:08

Unread post27 Oct 2008, 07:56

Talk about jets.

However, randomly pitting jets against each other in these scenarios is like saying one centerfold model is better than another. In some instances, one gal is better looking than the other but overall the two guys arguing are missing the picture (or what is in it).

I remember a discussion with Robin Olds at a bar. Believe it or not we were arguing whether the P-51 or the F-16 was better. He firmly stated that in a gun only dual the P-51 would prevail. I disagreed and this went back and forth and several rounds of Scotch were purchased.

Finally the winner was.... the Scotch, and good Scotch at that.
Offline

sprstdlyscottsmn

Elite 4K

Elite 4K

  • Posts: 4545
  • Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 01:24
  • Location: Phoenix, Az, USA

Unread post14 Nov 2008, 16:06

LOL! Well Robin certainly had a valid point in that the Stang would have more trigger time and a tighter turning radius, but the Viper handidly out powers it, so the Viper could dictate the engagement and would have to rely on slashing passes.

As to the origional question, if we are talking Vandy-9 then you could outfit the Cat with 6 AMRAAMs and two Sidewinders...frightening opposition there.
"Spurts"

-Pilot
-Aerospace Engineer
-Army Medic
-FMS Systems Engineer
Offline

avon1944

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 404
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2004, 02:03

Unread post05 Dec 2008, 08:05

supermarinespitfire wrote:Couldn't the Supercat carry the AMRAAM?

The F-14D was the first fourth generation fighter to verify the fighter/missile software interface for the AMRAAM. The decision was made not convert the F-14B/D to carry the AMRAAM because it already had an ARH missile -the Phoenix. Plus there had already been talk of retiring the F-14 because the Cold War was over, it had outlived the threat.

supermarinespitfire wrote:I like the Hornet better than the Viper though (Cobra should've won the LWF program!).

The cobra did not meet the USAF's needs as well as the F-16A. The F-16 shared the same engine as the F-15A already in the USAF inventory. The F-16 was designed using Col. John Boyd's energy maneuvering theory, just like the F-15A. That was the new religion in USAF. The YF-17 was not. GD was able to deliver the first operational F-16 a little more than a year before the F-18 could become operational by Northrop.
I have been an F-14A since Northrop signed the contract back in 1969 but, the F-14 was not designed to 'knife fight' with a fighter of the F-16's capability. The F-14 would have to win the fight before the merge!
Neither of these two LWF's met the USN's needs but, the YF-17 offered more promise in being able to be modified to meet their needs. As for a carrier borne F-16N;

The Conversion of The F-16A To The Navalized F-16N
AW&ST issues Jan. 20, 1975 Pg 28 / Jan. 27, 1975 Pg 17

There are numerous differences between the landbased F-16 (Model #1600) and the aircraft carrier version (Model #1601).

1 -The fuselage is stretched, both forward and aft.
2 -The wingspan is wider and each wing has a increase in area of 57 square feet. The chord was also greater.
3 -The flaps are larger.
4 -The distance between the trailing edge of the wing to the stablator is greater.
5 -The area of the stablator is greater and the width is greater.
6 -The fuselage area ahead of the cockpit is broader.
7 -The chord of the wing is longer.
8 -It would be powered by the P&W401 engine.
9 -The stablators are larger in area and their span is greater.
10 -Many materials used on the F-16A would have to be change on the F-16N in order to deal with the salt water environment.
11 -The landing gear would have to be much stronger as well as having a greater width between the wheels.
12 -The Navy version of the F-16 would be manufactured by LTV!

Adrian
Offline

avon1944

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 404
  • Joined: 24 Nov 2004, 02:03

Unread post14 Dec 2008, 01:18

CORRECTION;
I have been a fan of the F-14 back in 1969 when Grumman won the contract, not Northrop as I previously wrote!
Offline

kristianisme

Newbie

Newbie

  • Posts: 17
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2011, 00:28
  • Location: in the deepest darkest depths of your imagination....

Unread post07 Feb 2011, 08:24

not whod win the fight but.....

TOMCATS, BABY!!
Offline

discofishing

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1421
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008, 22:15
  • Location: USA

Unread post07 Feb 2011, 10:50

F-14B vs F-16C/E:

WVR - F-16C/E wins (JHMCS/AIM-9X combo is just too much for the Tomcat)
BVR - F-14B wins (against F-16C) / F-16E beats out F-14B

I know the AWG-9 is an antique now, but isn't it still better for BVR than anything (APG-66VX or APG-68VX) that's ever been in the nose of an F-16C

F-14D vs F-16C/E:

WVR - F-16C/E wins hands down (JHMCS/AIM-9X provides the edge)
BVR - F-14D beats F-16C / F-16E beats F-14D
Offline

aaam

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 902
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2010, 22:52

Unread post08 Feb 2011, 03:58

discofishing wrote:F-14B vs F-16C/E:

WVR - F-16C/E wins (JHMCS/AIM-9X combo is just too much for the Tomcat)
BVR - F-14B wins (against F-16C) / F-16E beats out F-14B

I know the AWG-9 is an antique now, but isn't it still better for BVR than anything (APG-66VX or APG-68VX) that's ever been in the nose of an F-16C

F-14D vs F-16C/E:

WVR - F-16C/E wins hands down (JHMCS/AIM-9X provides the edge)
BVR - F-14D beats F-16C / F-16E beats F-14D



F-14D had it remained in production would certainly have had JHMCS/AIM-9X at the same time or before the F-16. In fact, it would probably have had it in both cockpits, ala the F/A-18E/F.

As for AIM-120 on the F-14, the powers that were in NAVAIR by that time were firmly wedded to the F/A-18E/F. Although the introduction (done initially through back channels) of LANTIRN was wildly successful on the -14, no money was going to be forthcoming to deploy it to the Fleet. The way it happened was that the F-14 community volunteered to give up integration of AIM-120 on the Tomcat if the monies involved could be reprogrammed to put LANTIRN aboard.
Next

Return to F-16 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest