F-16C, F-16E vs F-14D

[garrya]

How would a F-16C or F-16E ( equipped with 6 Aim-120 , no CFT) fare again F-14D equipped with( 4 Aim-7 , 4 Aim-9 ) in dogfight?
No WVR or HMD on either side.

I used to think F-14 is a slug in dogfight but it turn out according to flight manual F-14 have very compatible sustain turn rate vs F-16 , and much better instantaneous turn rate at slow speed.


It seem like F-16 turn better at high speed while F-14 is better at slower speed , I think that may translate to better vertical fight for F-16 , and better nose pointing for F-14 but iam not 100 % sure, so can anyone ( pointing especially at you guy : Johnwill , Gums , sprut ) tell me which aircraft is better in that configuration mentioned at the start ?

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

Where did you get the NAVAIR chart for the F-14? I have been looking for source data on the Cats. Remember than the D model cat has ~40% more useful thrust. There is an quote floating around somewhere (I've heard too many to remember where I heard them all) by an Eagle driver, "We think we fly the best fighter in the world, but we don't get slow against the gents in the fourteens." I used to think that meant they didn't relax, but as you can see it means literally getting slow. Below 0.7M the F-14 will turn tighter in both sustained and instant capacities. This means you will almost always have a larger turn radius than a Cat flown in it's comfort zone. You need to go vertical. The old A model had a "T/W" of 1.0 when completely empty. Make it point up and it will slow down. The A+/B/D changed all that. Vipers and Eagles would still easily take them in the vertical but it was not the easy move it used to be. In a Viper or Hornet you could even try getting them REAL slow and using superior low speed handing from the FBW to out roll them. In the end I would say teamwork is the BIGGEST factor for success. One problem for the Cat is that it starts to fall apart as the wings go back as far as turning so if the opposing pilot sees wings back they know they have a turning advantage and this is when the Cat driver may go vertical.

[35_aoa]

You can get a little slower in a Viper than what I've seen an Eagle do, but it just never makes sense in either case. In a Viper in full AB, if you can unload to 0G for just even a couple seconds, you will go from that poorly chosen slow fight, to having enough airspeed to go up, which a Tomcat or Hornet in that scenario will not be able to do. Conversely, if you let the fight get both slow and close, it is pretty hard to not get flushed out. The Viper also does bad things when you get too slow and still try to go up, or you combine a lot of real aggressive combined roll/yaw at high AoA and let the sideslip/yaw rate get out of control. Two other good reasons not to get slow.

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

Looking at the above "D" model chart and a previously posted A model chart "with maneuver Devices inop" the A model does better and sustained turning in the supersonic to the point of having a higher top speed as well. Plugging the glove vanes and suffering the full trim drag is the only reason I can think of.

[eloise]

If iam not mistaken , from the graph their sustain turn rate is similar around 14-15 degree /second just at different speed


I can understand how normal turn fight would work because if one aircraft have superior turn rate then after a while it will end up behind enemy tail. However eventhough I also heard a lot about taking the fight to vertical but I have no idea how it done ,Ex : if the enemy pilot go climb up couldn't you just wait and fly in a horizontal circle instead of trying to follow him ?
and if enemy then try to go back down to make a pass at your aircraft I think you can observe where they come from to turn your nose to that direction it really hard for me to understand how vertical ( boom-zoom ) fight would work unless the enemy have no idea where you came from

[garrya]

Where did you get the NAVAIR chart for the F-14? I have been looking for source data on the Cats. Remember than the D model cat has ~40% more useful thrust. There is an quote floating around somewhere (I've heard too many to remember where I heard them all) by an Eagle driver, "We think we fly the best fighter in the world, but we don't get slow against the gents in the fourteens." I used to think that meant they didn't relax, but as you can see it means literally getting slow. Below 0.7M the F-14 will turn tighter in both sustained and instant capacities. This means you will almost always have a larger turn radius than a Cat flown in it's comfort zone. You need to go vertical. The old A model had a "T/W" of 1.0 when completely empty. Make it point up and it will slow down. The A+/B/D changed all that. Vipers and Eagles would still easily take them in the vertical but it was not the easy move it used to be. In a Viper or Hornet you could even try getting them REAL slow and using superior low speed handing from the FBW to out roll them. In the end I would say teamwork is the BIGGEST factor for success. One problem for the Cat is that it starts to fall apart as the wings go back as far as turning so if the opposing pilot sees wings back they know they have a turning advantage and this is when the Cat driver may go vertical.

I got the chart from a member here
http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=157416&page=5

[garrya]

I can understand how normal turn fight would work because if one aircraft have superior turn rate then after a while it will end up behind enemy tail. However eventhough I also heard a lot about taking the fight to vertical but I have no idea how it done ,Ex : if the enemy pilot go climb up couldn't you just wait and fly in a horizontal circle instead of trying to follow him ?
and if enemy then try to go back down to make a pass at your aircraft I think you can observe where they come from to turn your nose to that direction it really hard for me to understand how vertical ( boom-zoom ) fight would work unless the enemy have no idea where you came from

Interesting enough , X-31 with thrust vectoring totally demolished F-14 and F-18 but fail to get a positive kill ratio again F-16 and F-15 due to their superior T/W

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

One of my professors was involved from the AF side showing that the Eagle and Viper only had to wait for the X-31 to vector and then they could just climb.

[garrya]

One of my professors was involved from the AF side showing that the Eagle and Viper only had to wait for the X-31 to vector and then they could just climb.

wouldn't the X-31 successful point it's nose at F-16 , F-15 once it use vector ? ( Iike almost instant)
and when F-16/F-15 come down to attack shouldn't X-31 be able to turn it's nose at their direction too , making it a head on pass ?

[sprstdlyscottsmn]

Nothing is ever that simple is it? If it was then the X-31 would not have scored zero victories against the AF jets. Many of these were neutral setups, like an escort gone bad. Turn into him, he pitches up into post stall and swings nose in direction you turned. If you stayed horizontal you shot out in front of him for the kill, but you go vertical. Now you are a few hundred knots faster and climbing up while he is mush as far as changing his velocity vector making his next movements very predictable. The F-22 has the engine power to not fall prey to this tactic. Sorry, we are way

[eloise]

so here what I found about vertical-energy fighting again more agile fighter :
I don't about the accuracy nut sound reasonable enough , if flying fast can give your missiles more range it probably give your bullet more range too

Right On JP. Guns only from a butterfly. I like it. This reduces pretty much everything to mano v mano.

Remember, 20MM is a launch and leave all aspect weapon (admittedly a brainless one). Its' range is a function of muzzle velocity plus any velocity (closure) imparted to it by the aircraft doing the shooting.

So for the sake of the discussion, let’s assume the butterfly turns into a series of head on passes (pure closure) and that the thrust vectoring, post stall maneuvering X-31 “goes for it” on the first head on pass, playing to his supposed strength. The range of his 20MM is now solely a function of muzzle velocity.

I, in my X-29, being aware I cannot “out-nose-point” him, make only my first turn a bat turn and pass him close aboard on the first one.

From the butterfly at 450K, both of us are probably too close to use the gun this pass, and I keep my speed up and gain some separation for purposes of executing what will necessarily be, thanks to him, another head on pass. He may now be thrust vectoring like crazy, just pointing at me, maybe even post stall, and muzzle velocity is all he can impart to his 20MM.

I however make a relatively big sweeping optimum turn outside of 4000 feet and come back at him at the speed of stink.

The range of my 20MM is muzzle velocity + the speed of stink, and I open fire based on this and break off the head on pass in some optimum plane for E-M before I get within his “muzzle velocity only” range. Think of a strafe panel.

Maybe I hit him the first time, maybe I don’t, but I do the same thing each time until I do or he changes his tactic, possibly playing to my strength.

Thrust vectoring, post stall maneuvering, etc. (Cobras), these are all primarily defensive options. It’s nice to have available, but if someone insists on going slow with it in a gunfight, admittedly they definitely have proven whose more maneuverable, and it would probably be a nice gesture if the other guy assured it was written on their epitaph that they were “more maneuverable”.

Theoretically, all else equal, this could work no matter what weapon you’re using, as long as both guys are using the same one and you can get out of range of it on the first pass. You may just have to get further away.

From my experience, this is kind of like fighting A-10's with the F-4.

regards, OL

viewtopic.php?t=11020

[eloise]

there probably some others factor too , Mig-23 , mig-21bis with superior T/W in theory should be able to defeat F-16 , F-15 by going vertical , but in reality they seem to lose horribly

[geforcerfx]

there probably some others factor too , Mig-23 , mig-21bis with superior T/W in theory should be able to defeat F-16 , F-15 by going vertical , but in reality they seem to lose horribly

uhh neither of those aircraft have a T/W over 1, how are they going to beat the F-16 and F-15 in the vertical?

[eloise]

there probably some others factor too , Mig-23 , mig-21bis with superior T/W in theory should be able to defeat F-16 , F-15 by going vertical , but in reality they seem to lose horribly

uhh neither of those aircraft have a T/W over 1, how are they going to beat the F-16 and F-15 in the vertical?

at high speed dynamic thrust of Mig-23 is better due to engine design and variable inlet ,
mig-21 have something called Emergency Afterburner

[geforcerfx]

there probably some others factor too , Mig-23 , mig-21bis with superior T/W in theory should be able to defeat F-16 , F-15 by going vertical , but in reality they seem to lose horribly

uhh neither of those aircraft have a T/W over 1, how are they going to beat the F-16 and F-15 in the vertical?

at high speed dynamic thrust of Mig-23 is better due to engine design and variable inlet ,
mig-21 have something called Emergency Afterburner

HIgh speed meaning not what they dog fight at, and the F-15 also has a intake ramp. The Mig-21 CSR mode could only be used below 13,000 feet and for less than 1 min in a dog fight, and had a chance of blowing up the engine.



Anyways back to the the post's topic, I would give the F-16E over the F-14D and the F-14D over the F-16C.