Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2019, 15:58
by steve2267
An acquaintance shared some photos he took of the F-35 in a four ship with an F-16, F-15, and F-22. A NASA F-18 is in one photo -- it was used as a photo ship. I was struck by just how much smaller the F-35 is compared to the Eagle and Raptor. Even though I know the F-35 is NOT an F-22... at first glance of an F-35 next to an F-22, my immediate reaction is that the F-35 is much further distant than the F-22. I've seen the line drawings & illustrations comparing the F-35 to various aircraft from a front and dorsal perspective, but seeing it in a photo is different for some reason.

Viper, Eagle, Lightning, Raptor - approach.png


Viper, Eagle, Lightning, Raptor - overhead.png


Viper, Eagle, Lightning, Raptor - overhead2.png


Viper, Eagle, Lightning, Raptor - departing.png


The F-35 will never have the visual signature of the F-16 (at least when it is clean). The Viper is just plain tiny in comparison, from a visual perspective from front or rear.

Viper, Eagle, Lightning, Raptor - departing(dots).png

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2019, 20:16
by spazsinbad
Thanks for comparo…. (rotated 36 degrees etc.)

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2019, 21:27
by steve2267
I got the idea to create this thread from a post by marsavian in the F-35 and Airshows thread. That link will jump you into the appropriate place (p.74) of that long thread.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 01 Mar 2019, 21:49
by spazsinbad
Ah you dun dood it. viewtopic.php?f=22&t=24622&p=412842&hilit=visual#p412842 Here are examples of comparos.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 02:02
by steve2267
I fought the Gimp... and, well... Gimp lost. But what a pain in the **** it was. NOT intuitive Gimp is.

I didn't bother throwing the images into AutoCAD and really precisely lining things up... but I did manage the following:

F-16, F-35, F-15, F-22 lineup (1024).png

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 11:25
by shania
F-35 size.jpg

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 14:36
by steve2267
Well, nutz... why didn't I think of that?

Nicely done! :cheers:

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 14:42
by basher54321
Is there a slight altitude difference there?

Probably not far off though I suppose here is one I did based on dimensions a while back.

F-16C.jpg
F16-F35

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 14:51
by steve2267
basher54321 wrote:Is there a slight altitude difference there?

Probably not far off though I suppose here is one I did based on dimensions a while back.

F-16C.jpg


Basher, it's certainly possible, but I don't know? IMO, any altitude difference is slight. The image manipulation was based on photo #2 in the five frame sequence shown above in this thread. Based on the skybackdrop between the Eagle's two air intakes and fuselage, it appears the fourship flew almost directly above the photographer. Image #5 shows the aircraft as they are receding in the distance,and would appear to show they are at the same altitude for all practical purposes.

I applied no scaling to individual airfame images.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 14:57
by steve2267
Basher, in your comparison image above, how did you line up the two images? Did you overlay the engine nozzle exhaust plane?

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 15:17
by basher54321
No Steve - dimensions converted to pixels and scaled individually - you can move the images wherever you like after that.

You have to be careful with dimensions and check whether they include pitot tube, wingtip missiles etc.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 15:19
by mixelflick
steve2267 wrote:I fought the Gimp... and, well... Gimp lost. But what a pain in the **** it was. NOT intuitive Gimp is.

I didn't bother throwing the images into AutoCAD and really precisely lining things up... but I did manage the following:

F-16, F-35, F-15, F-22 lineup (1024).png


I am struck most by wing area. The jump from F-16 to F-35, and F-15 to F-22. Add to that lift contributed to by the body of the F-35 and 22 and I guess you can see why each is so superior to it's teen counterpart. We know how much lift is generated by the F-15's fuselage, given that Israeli Eagle that landed - without one wing! The F-22's smooth, blended underside is a sight to behold, and if anything has even greater fuselage lift.

It's also mind boggling how much more fuel each carries vs. its predecessor.

What does the Eagle carry, 13,850lbs? 18,000lbs in the Raptor. And especially the F-35... F-16 carries 7,000lbs, and the F-35A a whopping 18,070!!! Throw in the fact they're clean when combat configured, and I guess that seals it - no comparison, much better legs vs. the teen series.

Fantastic pieces of engineering. Given all of that, it certainly makes the SU-57's podded engines/tunnel arrangement rather archaic. Not sure about the J-20, but to my eye it looks like they bolted the wings on a fuselage that doesn't fit. Sort of a mish mash of two different planes...

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 15:54
by steve2267
basher54321 wrote:No Steve - dimensions converted to pixels and scaled individually - you can move the images wherever you like after that.

You have to be careful with dimensions and check whether they include pitot tube, wingtip missiles etc.


Does the oft-quoted length figure of the F-16 include the nose pitot tube? That is, is the 49.5' length from the tip of the pitot tube to the end of the vertical fin?

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 16:02
by quicksilver
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.

Compare some images of pilots or plane captains preflighting an F-35 vs whatever and notice how much clearance there is above their head and the bottom of the wing.

Here's a for example for F-35 -- https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q ... 5493873458

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 16:02
by basher54321
Yes that includes the pitot tube so from the tip.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 16:06
by shania
steve2267 wrote:Well, nutz... why didn't I think of that?

Nicely done! :cheers:


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

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 16:15
by steve2267
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".

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 16:21
by spazsinbad
Back Before the last ICE AGE there is an F16 thread with images such as this; made by?: http://i.imgur.com/D5cGomB.png

Image

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 16:28
by steve2267
Damn, Spaz.... that thing is sooooo tiny.... It looks like you were driving a scooter! :crazypilot: :notworthy:

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 17:22
by sprstdlyscottsmn
was that pun intended?

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 17:34
by spazsinbad
Very PUNy. Here we go Here we go Here we go: viewtopic.php?f=54&t=28954&p=319707&hilit=D5cGomB#p319707

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 18:15
by steve2267
sprstdlyscottsmn wrote:was that pun intended?


Absofrigganlutely! :crazypilot:

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 18:17
by steve2267
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:

F-35 F-16 overlay.png



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

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 18:26
by basher54321
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.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 18:35
by quicksilver
Yeah, that’s way off...

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

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 18:54
by steve2267
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.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 22:38
by quicksilver
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.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 02 Mar 2019, 23:21
by steve2267
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?

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 00:26
by spazsinbad
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)

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 00:55
by quicksilver
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.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 02:03
by steve2267
quicksilver wrote: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.


Copy that. May have to re-create an overlay using a different Viper drawing... but cannot find any 3-view drawings of the F-35 from LM or the JPO / F35.com website or US services... so perhaps just overlaying the images ala what 'shania' did with the photos is the best we can do.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 02:17
by spazsinbad
Have amended / added to F-16 DIMENSION post on previous page. SHIRLEY there are credible F-35 Dimensions out there?
LM FAST FACTS FEB 2019: https://a855196877272cb14560-2a4fa819a6 ... _2019_.pdf (1.1Mb)

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 05:04
by white_lightning35
For what it's worth, the one time I have seen a f-35 at an air show, my thoughts were on how bulky and imposing it seemed, especially compared to a f-16. It is sometimes weird to consider them as being in the same "weight class", i.e small and affordable multirole fighters.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 09:49
by gc
I have always wondered why General Dynamics back then did not make an F-16 the size of a Mitsubishi F-2. Greater range, payload and 2 more heavy payload hard points would have made the f-16 much more capable. This would have allowed the Viper to carry 2 drop tanks, 2 x 2k JDAMS, 2 HARMS to suppress pop up SAM threats organically and 2 AMRAAMs. This loadout will allow the Viper to perform self-escort strike without SEAD support or allow a single Wild Weasel Viper to perform both SEAD/DEAD missions.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 15:20
by steve2267
It's all about the requirements, and meeting those requirements with the lowest cost solution.

I would suggest the following wording:

I have always wondered why the United States Air Force did not require the Lightweight Fighter Competition winner to be able to carry 2 drop tanks, 2 x 2k Mk84 bombs, and 2 Anti-Radiation Missiles (to suppress pop-up SAM threads), plus two radar guided missiles. An F-16 sized to meet these requirements would have been about the size of the Mitsubishi F-2, with greater range, greater payload, and, with the two additional heavy payload hard points, would have made the F-16 much more capable. This loadout will allow the Viper to perform self-escort strike without SEAD support or allow a single Wild Weasel Viper to perform both SEAD/DEAD missions.


Several notes:
1) The resulting fighter probably would not have been lightweight. As a result, at that time in the early '70s, the program would not have survived as it was billed as "cheaper."

2) Radar-guided missiles at that time were no bueno. The F-16 was not permitted Sparrow's until the mid or late '80s as recounted by Gums and others. The reason was that the F-16 would have been seen as competing with the F-15 Eagle in the air-to-air role. That was a non-starter back then. Also... the AMRAAM did not exist at in the early '70s... and the Sparrow was too large / too heavy to mount on the wing tip rails.

Other than those reasons, sure, why not? Whodda thunkit why a company was trying to win a contract by meeting the requirements and offering the cheapest solution to those requirements?

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 15:36
by basher54321
Basically yes - F-16 was designed as a lightweight relatively low cost Air to Air fighter and size was scaled to performance based on the Engine they were using. So e.g. combat radius was met by using external drop tanks which could then be discarded when performance was required.

The USAF did make the F-16 a bit bigger with a more fuel when it was redesigned as Multirole jet before it went into production.

But I mean really the multirole F-16 was the F-16XL and they didn't have the funding to do that. Likewise MSIP IV (Agile Falcon) was also not funded so not like the options have not been there - somebody felt it was better to persevere with the existing F-16A-D design and that was that.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 15:41
by mixelflick
steve2267 wrote:
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:

F-35 F-16 overlay.png



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

This is quite remarkable. I say that because sitting on the ground, the F-35A looked so much bigger to me than the F-16 (Westover AIr Force Base, Great New England Airshow 2018). Although they weren't in close proximity, the F-35 appeared far larger. It sat much closer to a pair of F-15C's, and looked decidedly smaller.

But this graphic really surprised me. I suppose it gets back to the "thick" fuselage. In comparison to a clean F-16 on the ground, it looks like a tank, LOL. But kudos to the engineers at LM. Both F-15 and 16 pilots had wonderful things to say about it. The F-35A pilot I spoke with came from F-15's, and was quite enthusiastic about his new mount. "90% of what I do in this jet, I could never have done in an F-15..." was his comment.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 16:37
by gc
True true. F-16s were more than enough for threats back then. But times has changed. Without a change in size and weight will it be possible to use modern materials to allow the F-16 wing to support a heavy weapons outboad pylon? This change can allow Vipers to carry 4 HARMs or 16 SDB or 4 Harpoons with wingtip AMRAAMs and 2 drop tanks.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 17:21
by marsavian
Don't CFTs have the same effect you are looking for at least partially ? F-16 is on its last development legs, unless it's easy and cheap can't see what you suggest being carried out in terms of extra/heavier pylons especially when IRST/jammers have to be carried externally as it is.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 18:41
by steve2267
gc wrote:True true. F-16s were more than enough for threats back then. But times has changed. Without a change in size and weight will it be possible to use modern materials to allow the F-16 wing to support a heavy weapons outboad pylon? This change can allow Vipers to carry 4 HARMs or 16 SDB or 4 Harpoons with wingtip AMRAAMs and 2 drop tanks.


First you "complained" about "why didn't GD make the F-16 bigger." That question was answered. Now you wonder about using "modern materials to allow the F-16 wing..." First, what modern materials would you suggest? The F-16 isn't made out of modern materials? But WAIT! Don't answer that! Because second... there is an F-16 forum for that. Why don't you take your F-16 questions, that are wholly unrelated to the F-35, to the F-16 forum(s)? Plenty of people would love to yak with you about the F-16 over there.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 03 Mar 2019, 18:52
by spazsinbad
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... ae-445494/
SINGAPORE: RSAF deploys F-15, F-16s in three-ship aerial display
https://www.flightglobal.com/assets/get ... emid=72825 [ROTATED 11 Degrees so axis of aircraft are horizontal]

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2019, 14:46
by mixelflick
Beautiful shot!

Those big GE F-110's in the F-15... Has anyone ever commented on how much greater performance F-15SG's have, vs. say our F-15C's? I realize the SG is more of an air to ground pounder. But strip off the CFT's and arm her with AMRAAM's and 9x's... must be a real rocket ship.

Almost 60,000lbs of thrust vs. not quite 50,000 in the C has to bring some advantages??

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 04 Mar 2019, 14:51
by sferrin
mixelflick wrote:Beautiful shot!

Those big GE F-110's in the F-15... Has anyone ever commented on how much greater performance F-15SG's have, vs. say our F-15C's? I realize the SG is more of an air to ground pounder. But strip off the CFT's and arm her with AMRAAM's and 9x's... must be a real rocket ship.

Almost 60,000lbs of thrust vs. not quite 50,000 in the C has to bring some advantages??


Supposedly the -229s in some F-15Es regularly hit 30,000lbs+.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 05 Mar 2019, 00:51
by spazsinbad
Always like F-35 variant info so this is an example with extra FREWfrew for my PDF page size. GIF made from PDF below.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 05 Mar 2019, 01:29
by spazsinbad
Perhaps this version F-35 THREE AMIGOS variants measurement details more useful/informative? GIF made from PDF.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 11 Mar 2019, 06:37
by garrya
formation.jpg

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 11 Mar 2019, 13:04
by madrat
Brilliant picture, garrya. Almost missed the Ajeet.

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 11 Mar 2019, 15:37
by mixelflick
Which aircraft is trailing the Mig-25? Mig-29???

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 20 Mar 2019, 02:44
by garrya
Gripen and Typhoon
6826C715-93B8-4291-9B2E-9F0F849A3C67.jpeg

Re: Visual comparison and contrast with Raptor, Eagle, Viper

Unread postPosted: 20 Mar 2019, 03:25
by madrat
garrya-

And a Mirage 2000 on right.