F-16 still best turn rate?

Hookturn wrote:... Or maritime patrol turboprops.

I agree. Turn rates on those WWII or any props isn't anything to sneeze or laugh at.

[..]

The SU-27 represents the pinnacle of aircraft performance. With an 1800 nm range, and the ability to support test projects for extended periods, including 25 minutes of afterburner operations per sortie, our demilitarized Flankers are more cost effective than any other supersonic platform on today’s market.

Bullshit. 25 minutes in AB? That can't be right can it?

The F-16 and F-15 are the best sustained energy turning fighter of the 4th generation. No Su-27,30,or MKI or Mig-29 can compete in this category. To not talk about supersonic turn performances were the gap is even higher. Russian current fighters are largely overrated and their reputation has more to do with the glamorous sight of the low-speed but very,very rare dogfight than with actual (Liban, Gulf, Yougoslavia) combat, where overall weapons system and others assets improving SA make the differrence. Today the principle (speed is life) still applies. Even Boyd never argued for low speed dogfighter, but for energy fighter. The F-16 and F-15 were the best and the F-22 will just continue in the same way.

Let me jump on this hand grenade ... With 500 hrs in the MiG-29 [plus 900 in the light-gray Eagle and 2000-plus in the Viper (Viper FWIC grad)], the Fulcrum will sustain a higher turn rate than the Eagle but not as high as the Viper. I've seen this in numerous 'engagements' against both plus I've flow the Viper against the MiG-29 many times. I do agree that the airplane can be very overrated with it being a better airshow airplane than a fighter.

fulcrumflyer wrote:

The F-16 and F-15 are the best sustained energy turning fighter of the 4th generation. No Su-27,30,or MKI or Mig-29 can compete in this category. To not talk about supersonic turn performances were the gap is even higher. Russian current fighters are largely overrated and their reputation has more to do with the glamorous sight of the low-speed but very,very rare dogfight than with actual (Liban, Gulf, Yougoslavia) combat, where overall weapons system and others assets improving SA make the differrence. Today the principle (speed is life) still applies. Even Boyd never argued for low speed dogfighter, but for energy fighter. The F-16 and F-15 were the best and the F-22 will just continue in the same way.

Let me jump on this hand grenade ... With 500 hrs in the MiG-29 [plus 900 in the light-gray Eagle and 2000-plus in the Viper (Viper FWIC grad)], the Fulcrum will sustain a higher turn rate than the Eagle but not as high as the Viper. I've seen this in numerous 'engagements' against both plus I've flow the Viper against the MiG-29 many times. I do agree that the airplane can be very overrated with it being a better airshow airplane than a fighter.

What is your background that allowed you to fly both Russian Migs (29) and American F-15's and F-16's???


Respecfully,

What is your background that allowed you to fly both Russian Migs (29) and American F-15's and F-16's???

USAF exchange pilot with the Luftwaffe at Laage AB, Germany.

fulcrumflyer wrote:

What is your background that allowed you to fly both Russian Migs (29) and American F-15's and F-16's???

USAF exchange pilot with the Luftwaffe at Laage AB, Germany.

Now that makes sense..............impressive!

That make sense only if this CV is true.....

So fulcrumflyer, if you are the pilot you pretend to be, it would be very easy to you to answer to the following questions.

1. What are initial OOCF recovery procedures for the F-15?

2. What are initial OOCF recovery procedures for the F-16?

2a. F-16 with P&W engine

2b. F-16 with GE engine

3. What are initial recovery procedures for F-16 in an inverted Deep Stall ?

4. What the initial value of yaw rate for the aural departure warning tone in
the F-15?

5. In the F-15, are they AOA or sideslip feedbacks into CAS or flight control system for departure resistance?

6. In the F-16, how does flight control laws function below a precise AOA value and above this particular AOA value and how much is this value?

7. What is the normal AOA training aircraft configuration for the F-16 and F-15 respectively?

8. With a functionnal aircraft (inside cg limits, normal wing asymmetry,nose imperfection etc), which of these two aircrafts will clearly recover quicker from any departure?

I maintain my previous statements about turnrate.

Respectfully

FF is indeed legit.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/pro ... play=posts

I don't know how anyone could fake those posts. Nice to see you around FF!

Baz,
Believe what you want. I don't pretend to be anything. Pretty ballsy to be throwing out insults at someone you don't know. You're invited to the USAF Weapons School where I'm a contract academic instructor. You gotta be a graduate to be a instructor at the School.

As to your questions - Most would require digging out my -1. I last flew the Eagle in Jan 1987 as a punk captain. I last flew the Viper in Oct 2004. Retired now. However, Viper OOC (Block 40 / 50):

In the event of a departure from controlled flight, accomplish as much of the following as required to affect a recovery:

1. Controls - Release.
2. Throttles - Idle (GE), Mil (Pratt and Whimpy).

If still out of control

3. MPO sw - Override and hold.
4. Stick - Cycle in phase.

MiG 29 OOC:

Non-secific spin rotation (like a falling leaf):
1. Flight controls – Neutral.
2. Throttles – Idle.

Stable spin rotation:

1. Rudder – Full opposite spin direction / turn needle.
2. Stick – Neutral after 2 – 3 sec.
3. Throttles – Idle.

If rotation stops:

4. Controls – Neutral.

salute

if you work out the min speed for a nine gee three sixty that the viper used to do for the demo, you come up up with over twenty-five degrees per second.

the original demo did the nine gee turn, then pulled up for an immuelman. very impressive back in seventy-nine.

gums sends ...

p.s. nice to see fulcrum-breath here

Don't throw any insult. I'm just verify. You just forget rudder input opposite to yaw direction before "If still out of control". All others questions are mostly basic to a pilot with your experience. But if you need to get in Dash-1, I will just wait.

Just have a problem to imagine how an aircraft limited to 7.5g above Mach 0.85 SL can have a better sustained turn rate than an F-15 in a sustained 9g Mach 0.9 SL turn?

Respectfully

fulcrumflyer,

It'd be very interesting to know you oppinion of Fulcrum vs. Viper climb and accelleration, in particularly sub-transonic. Perhaps even clean vs. combat loaded.

And what about cockpit ergonomics, earlier Fulcrums still an exercise in arm aerobics like the Flogger?

B. Bolsøy
Oslo

What I left off was "if in AB" as far as what to do with the throttle in a PW-equipped Viper. Notice the note in the first line about Block 40 and 50. There is no "rudder opposite yaw direction" with the Blocks 40 and 50 digital FLCS.

Actually, the limit for 9g in the MiG-29 starts above 0.85M and decreases linearly to 7.5g at 0.95M.

To use baz’s point (and the discussion is about best sustained turn rate) –
F-15 at 9g / sea level / 0.9M
MiG-29 at 9g / sea level / 0.85M (less than 9g allowable ABOVE 0.85M)

To maintain a level turn at 9 g requires 82.5 degrees of bank.
Let’s assume a standard day. The speed of sound is 661.7 knots, so 0.9M = 595.5 knots and 0.85m = 562.5 knots.

Now some simple math …

Radius of turn = velocity (in knots) squared / (11.26 x tangent of bank angle)

Turn radius at 0.9M = 4127 feet.
Turn radius at 0.85M = 3683 feet.

Rate of turn = (1091 x tangent of bank angle) / velocity (in knots)

Turn rate at 0.9M = 14 deg / sec.
Turn rate at 0.85M = 14.8 deg / sec.

Why would the Fulcrum pilot want to stay in a regime where he is airframe limited and be forced to maintain a slower turn rate with a higher turn radius? The Mach meter was one of the biggest instruments in the cockpit and you were forced into chameleon eye to make sure you didn’t over-g the airplane at the merge. But to baz, you’re right. If we’re at sea level and doing 0.9M, then the Eagle has the advantage because the MiG is g-limited. Neither aircraft is thrust limited down in the thick air. Both pilots would be smart to slow down (to a point) relative to the other in order to bring the nose around quicker. However, (because I’ve seen it and lived it) up in the thin air where the merges generally take place, the MiG-29 will sustain a higher rate turn than the Eagle. It’s close, and a lot boils down to the pilot, but the edge goes to the Fulcrum. Sorry to burst your bubble.

energo,
Fulcrum vs Viper climb and acceleration? All GE-powered F-16s are much better than the MiG-29. PW-powered F-16s (with the exception of the -220 A-model and the -229 powered Block 52) don’t compare favorably. Start hanging bombs, tanks and pods on the F-16, however …

The arm aerobics are something you get used to. It’s busy but not something you can’t get used to and not as bad as the Flogger. The biggest shortcomings were what WAS NOT displayed on the radar scope and HUD, the lack of range and the poor handling qualities.

Wow - wasnt expecting to see that on a thread about what has the best turn rate - welcome fulcrumflyer

Simple math... Required bank angle for 9g is arccos(1/9) and this give you 83.6°. Turnrate at Mach 0.9 and 9 g = 16.4°/s. Now, anbody with a good knowledge of F-15 should know that, the higher the altitude and speed, the better it will compare to anything. In those conditions an PW-220 engine would be more efficient in the F-15 due to the complex 4 ramps intake nozzle. Maj. Doug Russell, who was an exchange pilot in Laage flying Mig-29, never quoted the Mig as a better turning machine. Yet it never talked of the Mig as an easy target WVR and I neither do. Don't forget I talked about high energy turn performances! But never forget, if needed,the F-15 can perform astonishing, short period, maneuver at very high AOA and low speed at the expense of altitude and energy. The Mig is not different in this regime.

Respectfully