Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

shania · by **shania** » 02 Mar 2019, 16:06

steve2267 wrote:Well, nutz... why didn't I think of that?

Nicely done!

Created in Gimp:)
Magic wand, stroke selection and layers

1a. magic wand to select outlines (in this case no correction was needed)
1b. create new layer
2. Edit > Stroke Selection (line width 1) and you have outlines in separate layer, repeat for each color
3. Use square selection to copy outline of plane (check if you have selected right layer), copy + paste and save in new layer - then you can move it

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 02 Mar 2019, 16:15

In the first photo of the OP, the Lightning is obviously at the front of the formation. But it is very easy to think that it is an F-22 in the distance behind the F-15 and F-22 in the formation.

quicksilver wrote:When one stands near an F-35, it 'feels' much larger that its planform might suggest (in comparison to the Viper). Two principle reasons for this are, 1) as discussed, the F-35 has lotsa fuselage volume; and, 2) when all that volume is further from the ground (i.e. you have more ground clearance in order to open the bays and have some degree of ease in loading them) it feels like a very large aircraft. Next to a Viper (even a clasic Hornet) those jets 'feel' like greyhounds in comparison.

From a planform perspective, the length and width of the Lightning are only slightly larger than the Viper, but the "fullness" of the Lightning fuselage, created by the side intakes and the increased wing area created by the reverse swept wing trailing edge, tends to dominate a visual comparison.

The "largeness" of the F-35 fuselage is noticed in the photo #5, where the F-35 appears to me to be more noticeable than the F-16. That is, the "spotting factor", if you will, of the F-35 is higher than the F-16. If the F-16 is harder to see... I can only imagine how hard it must be to spot an F-5 in the air. To my eye, the F-35 is easier to spot than an F-16, but harder to see than either an F-15 or an F-22.

ETA:
In that last photo, the NASA F-18 chase is the dot in the upper left hand corner. I put the F-18 in between the F-16 and F-35 in terms of visual "spotting factor".

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 02 Mar 2019, 16:21

Back Before the last ICE AGE there is an F16 thread with images such as this; made by?: http://i.imgur.com/D5cGomB.png

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 02 Mar 2019, 16:28

Damn, Spaz.... that thing is sooooo tiny.... It looks like you were driving a scooter! :crazypilot:

sprstdlyscottsmn · by **sprstdlyscottsmn** » 02 Mar 2019, 17:22

was that pun intended?

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 02 Mar 2019, 17:34

Very PUNy. Here we go Here we go Here we go: viewtopic.php?f=54&t=28954&p=319707&hilit=D5cGomB#p319707

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 02 Mar 2019, 18:15

sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:was that pun intended?

Absofrigganlutely! :crazypilot:

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 02 Mar 2019, 18:17

spazsinbad wrote:Very PUNy. Here we go Here we go Here we go: viewtopic.php?f=54&t=28954&p=319707&hilit=D5cGomB#p319707

Hey Spaz, thanks for digging out that old thread...

Following up on Basher's post... here is a Viper / Lightning overlay:

ETA: removed great. Wish this forum let you strikethrough text...

basher54321 · by **basher54321** » 02 Mar 2019, 18:26

steve2267 wrote:Following up on Basher's post... here is a great Viper / Lightning overlay:

Yeah something wrong there looks too big - maybe what happens if you don't know there is a pitot tube in the length dimension.

quicksilver · by **quicksilver** » 02 Mar 2019, 18:35

Yeah, that’s way off...

Walking underneath an F-35, you have to reach to touch the underside of the wing.

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 02 Mar 2019, 18:54

quicksilver wrote:Yeah, that’s way off...

Walking underneath an F-35, you have to reach to touch the underside of the wing.

In that last image overlay I posted, I do not believe the side-to-side overlay includes gear extended for the F-35. The image creator appears to have lined all the images up based on the pilot's head location for the longitudinal front<->back alignment. And it appears he may have lined up the side comparison overlay (i.e. how the fuselages overlay) by making the tip of the nose radomes coincident.

When I get a chance, I'll go back to the overhead photo (Photo #2), and use the technique 'shania' outlined to overlay the Viper on the Lightning, then I can compare that to the above image that Basher & QS both think is off.

quicksilver · by **quicksilver** » 02 Mar 2019, 22:38

Wing span looks like it needs some adjustment too. A couple feet on each side.

The first two pics you posted best capture the differences; when you see them together, in person, the differences are dramatic. I think basher is correct about the pitot.

steve2267 · by **steve2267** » 02 Mar 2019, 23:21

quicksilver wrote:Wing span looks like it needs some adjustment too. A couple feet on each side.

The first two pics you posted best capture the differences; when you see them together, in person, the differences are dramatic. I think basher is correct about the pitot.

Are you referring to the F-16 wingspan? F-16 wingspan is listed as 32' 8". Can anyone tell me if that is to the inside or outside of the wingtip missile rails?

spazsinbad · by **spazsinbad** » 03 Mar 2019, 00:26

I'll post DIMENSION pages from F-16A/B 2003 Flight Manual PDF however GRAPHIC below SAYS IT ALL regarding MISSILES.

https://www.filefactory.com/file/u1vvz4 ... Manual.pdf (36Mb)

NOW 4 page PDF about DIMENSIONS of the F-16C/D 2003 attached (wingtip/missiles measurements same as above) from:

https://www.filefactory.com/file/34ia8o ... Manual.pdf (16Mb)

quicksilver · by **quicksilver** » 03 Mar 2019, 00:55

The scale is just not right, particularly in profile. The F-16 is longer than the F-35...?

Perusing the -1, the Viper is 49’6” with the pitot included thereby being 18” shorter in length than the F-35.