Aircraft Vs Super Thread! 2

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Iceman, after Topgun

http://www.usafitz.com/SupportingPages/iceman.htm

[Mislovrit]

The V-22, it's a new-ish concept, so not surprising to have teething problems.

The tilt-rotor concept is actually pretty old, it just the Osprey is the first tilt-rotor aircraft to reach the production phase.

What's surprising is that it's been having teething problems for what, over a decade now?

395675[/snapback]

Even once the V-22 does get pass the "teething problems" it'll still have the of having little internal space to transport hardly anything except troops.

Osprey’s Cargo Capacity Driving Weapon Designs

Something of interest

India’s quest for fighter could cost losers dearly

Edited May 2, 2006 by Mislovrit

[Phalanx]

Oh man, I am going through some training at work this week and you would not believe some the FOUO (For Official Use Only) info I have learned about aircraft like the F-22, F-35, and V-22.  It really makes you wonder about what the air force and the US military aviation community in general are doing and thinking.  Some of the stuff I already know but since I do not know what all is unclassified I can't talk too much about it, but man I would hate to have to be flying an F-22 anytime in the next few years.  At least until a radically redone B model is made.

395668[/snapback]

Is it just unsafe to fly for a pilot? Perhaps the FBW and digital avionics/weapons systems have yet to mature?

Also I did hear@ARC that the F-22 CAN do a cobra, but we probably won't see it until the airshow demos start. Which is next year.

395682[/snapback]

I gotta agree with Shin about that possible severe flaw with the F-22's FBW system linked to it's TVE nozzles or maybe a few kinks in the aircraft's engines which would probably cause the aircraft to stall frequently or spin out of control.

Also, Shin I too, am honestly convinced that an F-22 can do a COBRA thanx to it's TVEN's but a CULBIT more impressively? No, because the F-22 of course lacks lateral vectoring capabilities or more so 3-D thrust vectoring like the SU-37 possesses. Sure, it would be cool if the F-22 could do the CULBIT, but because it has 2-D TV capabilities since 3-D would compromise it's stealth capabilties, it can't. So if the F-22 wasn't a stealth aircraft, it can do it like the SU-37. I don't know if you guys covered that in the first super thread but I thought that I just point that out.

P.S. Knight26 when they refer to 2-D and 3-D TV, does the D in that mean dimensional or directional?

[buddhafabio]

Is there any more to the f/a-18f vs f22 kill story. all i read is snippits of picture caption. and is it really f-18f or the aggressor squadron of f-18s

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Yes there was, heck look at the F-15s canopy the thing looks like it was always intended to be a two seater.

394569[/snapback]

I always figured that it looked that way as a design balance between the pilot's rear visibility and drag coefficient. Was it really designed that way due to plans for double seating?

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Oh man, I am going through some training at work this week and you would not believe some the FOUO (For Official Use Only) info I have learned about aircraft like the F-22, F-35, and V-22.  It really makes you wonder about what the air force and the US military aviation community in general are doing and thinking.  Some of the stuff I already know but since I do not know what all is unclassified I can't talk too much about it, but man I would hate to have to be flying an F-22 anytime in the next few years.  At least until a radically redone B model is made.

395668[/snapback]

Is it just unsafe to fly for a pilot? Perhaps the FBW and digital avionics/weapons systems have yet to mature?

Also I did hear@ARC that the F-22 CAN do a cobra, but we probably won't see it until the airshow demos start. Which is next year.

395682[/snapback]

I gotta agree with Shin about that possible severe flaw with the F-22's FBW system linked to it's TVE nozzles or maybe a few kinks in the aircraft's engines which would probably cause the aircraft to stall frequently or spin out of control.

Also, Shin I too, am honestly convinced that an F-22 can do a COBRA thanx to it's TVEN's but a CULBIT more impressively? No, because the F-22 of course lacks lateral vectoring capabilities or more so 3-D thrust vectoring like the SU-37 possesses. Sure, it would be cool if the F-22 could do the CULBIT, but because it has 2-D TV capabilities since 3-D would compromise it's stealth capabilties, it can't. So if the F-22 wasn't a stealth aircraft, it can do it like the SU-37. I don't know if you guys covered that in the first super thread but I thought that I just point that out.

P.S. Knight26 when they refer to 2-D and 3-D TV, does the D in that mean dimensional or directional?

395801[/snapback]

Culbit doesn't need 3d thrust vectoring....the SU-35 did it, and it only had 2d vectoring(just pitch). Same with the bell. BTW the first super thread went over 100 pages and yes, many of the things you point out, were pretty much all covered there. And Phalanx, don't put words in my mouth.

If the F-22 were really stall prone I'm pretty sure all of us would have heard years back. Not to mention the engines are close togethere(unlike the F-14) so the loss of one engine wouldn't be as bad as losing one on a tomcat.

Is there any more to the f/a-18f vs f22 kill story. all i read is snippits of picture caption. and is it really f-18f or the aggressor squadron of f-18s

It was a VFA-11 Red Rippers F/A-18F flown by a former tomcat crew who were in VF-11 and transitioned. The aggressors(VFC-12) have F/A-18Cs. BTW I hear some raptor pilots are pissed the gun camera footage was released.

[kalvasflam]

The thing about the French is that they just don't care much geopolitically who they sell to, after all, no one really cares about them. The fact that they're an annoyance to the US is just part of the sales package.

Buy Rafales... it will tweak the noses of the Boeing, (since we're having trouble in the commercial segments and besides, the US doesn't like to sell its hardware until 20 to 30 years after initial introduction)

I wonder how much they were asking for the Rafales. I think one reason that people still want to buy US hardware is all the advertising the US hardware had in the last decade. It's a bit misleading since the USAF/USN is more about how to use equipment than the quality of the equipment itself... so if you want sales pitch for military aircraft, it would go something like this:

US: Our hardware wins wars, see recent conflicts

Russian: Our hardware is cheap and easy to replace, (see recent conflicts)

European: Our hardware isn't as cheap as the Russians, it hasn't won any wars recently like the American hardware, but we don't like the Americans, so please buy us.

Chinese: We don't sell planes just yet... please call back in two decades, but by then, we'll be your high tech/low cost manufacturer of any military hardware.

[Phalanx]

And Phalanx, don't put words in my mouth.

395876[/snapback]

You didn't say please. But sometimes I gotta problem with repeating other people's stuff, so I'll watch out for that.

Also, Kalvasflam I strongly do agree with your theory about the hardware of various regions in general that produce fighter aircraft. America has the most complex and cutting edge technology in their hardware so that epitomizes why some other countries can afford to buy their fighters and hardware. But damn, I had no idea everybody hates France that much.

Edited May 2, 2006 by Phalanx

[Knight26]

In regards to Thrust Vecotring, and anything that says 2-D or 3-D, the D stands for Dimensional. A regular engine can be considering 1-D thrust vecotring because it only puts out thrust in one dimension, straight back (not including bleed over and over pressure waves). A 2-D thrust vectoring engine moves the thrust up and down as well and 3-D adds side to side. As to my F-22 comments, well lets just say that many of them have to do with environment, maintenance, and thermal issues. Anymore then that and I cannot say.

[Nied]

The thing about the French is that they just don't care much geopolitically who they sell to, after all, no one really cares about them.  The fact that they're an annoyance to the US is just part of the sales package.

Buy Rafales... it will tweak the noses of the Boeing, (since we're having trouble in the commercial segments and besides, the US doesn't like to sell its hardware until 20 to 30 years after initial introduction)

I wonder how much they were asking for the Rafales.  I think one reason that people still want to buy US hardware is all the advertising the US hardware had in the last decade.  It's a bit misleading since the USAF/USN is more about how to use equipment than the quality of the equipment itself... so if you want sales pitch for military aircraft, it would go something like this:

US: Our hardware wins wars, see recent conflicts

Russian: Our hardware is cheap and easy to replace, (see recent conflicts)

European: Our hardware isn't as cheap as the Russians, it hasn't won any wars recently like the American hardware, but we don't like the Americans, so please buy us.

Chinese: We don't sell planes just yet... please call back in two decades, but by then, we'll be your high tech/low cost manufacturer of any military hardware.

395913[/snapback]

That's not entirely true. Rafales actually saw service over Afganistan. Unfortunetly they were Rafale Ms that hadn't had their A-G software installed yet so they were left flying CAP against the vaunted Afgan Air Force. Of course during the last few major conflicts European equipment saw real service. Just about every NATO air force participated in the first Desert Storm (with the exception of the W. German Luftwaffe), NATO aircraft were integral to most of the Balkan campaigns including Allied force, NATO was involved during OEF (see above), and the RAF saw quite a bit of action during OIF.

[F-ZeroOne]

The RN and RAF also saw a little bit of action over the Falklands. Might come in handy that, if someone one day wants to make a new V/STOL fighter...

[Mislovrit]

Buy Rafales... it will tweak the noses of the Boeing, (since we're having trouble in the commercial segments

Going by their earning reports Boeing is doing very well.Boeing rides commercial jets to 29% earnings jump

Boeing rides high on Big Mo

[kalvasflam]

That's not entirely true.  Rafales actually saw service over Afganistan.  Unfortunetly they were Rafale Ms that hadn't had their A-G software installed yet so they were left flying CAP against the vaunted Afgan Air Force.   Of course during the last few major conflicts European equipment saw real service.  Just about every NATO air force participated in the first Desert Storm (with the exception of the W. German Luftwaffe), NATO aircraft were integral to most of the Balkan campaigns including Allied force, NATO was involved during OEF (see above), and the RAF saw quite a bit of action during OIF.

395936[/snapback]

Heh heh, tell the media that. What you say is true. But let's face it, as a general statement, you don't see much non US equipment in wars. Well, at least the media in the US doesn't cover it well.

Mis, that statement was from the point of view of Airbus, which incidently doesn't have much if anything to do with the military consortium of Europe. But I used it as a general statement, since EU is now this big homoginized happy family.

Edited May 2, 2006 by kalvasflam

[F360°]

Getting stuck for 5 hours inside one of the most technologically-advanced fighter in the world.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/...ter+canopy.html

[Phalanx]

Getting stuck for 5 hours inside one of the most technologically-advanced fighter in the world.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/...ter+canopy.html

395961[/snapback]

OK Knight 26, is this maybe another one of those various reasons why you said you might never want to fly a an F-22? IMHO, I don't think all of the Raptors have this problem with their canopies.

[Nied]

Getting stuck for 5 hours inside one of the most technologically-advanced fighter in the world.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/...ter+canopy.html

395961[/snapback]

OK Knight 26, is this maybe another one of those various reasons why you said you might never want to fly a an F-22? IMHO, I don't think all of the Raptors have this problem with their canopies.

395976[/snapback]

Actually they just might. My understanding is that was a computer glitch with no way to overide it.

[reddsun1]

Looks mighty cozy in that there cockpit. I'm surprised some of those pics weren't considered "sensitive" material. Then again, it's only blank display screens and such...

[Skull Leader]

Is there any more to the f/a-18f vs f22 kill story. all i read is snippits of picture caption. and is it really f-18f or the aggressor squadron of f-18s

It was a VFA-11 Red Rippers F/A-18F flown by a former tomcat crew who were in VF-11 and transitioned. The aggressors(VFC-12) have F/A-18Cs. BTW I hear some raptor pilots are pissed the gun camera footage was released.

395876[/snapback]

That's no lie. On another site that David and I frequent, a Raptor driver went as far as to have the thread cited as a "security concern" in order to get thread shut down by the moderators. He's not too happy it showed up and the rest of the board hasn't stopped laughing at him since. Meanwhile the Navy is having a field day distributing those photos (a guy I know in VFA-103 who claims there is much more where that came from)

I'm gonna go on a limb and speculate here, it's just an opinion and personal observation.

The reason "Waco" was so quick to try and get that picture yanked is because right now the USAF is banking on the F-22A's "invincible" image being untarnished so they can continue to push for more airframes, and any sign of weakness is immediately pounced upon by the "have-nots".

Don't get me wrong, I like the F-22 (and yes it is more than capable of performing a cobra/culbit). It's a great and capable fighter to replace the USAF's aging F-15 fleet (if the Tomcat community had to deal with change, can the Eagle community be far behind?)... but just like every other jet out there, it isn't perfect. VFA-11 and VFA-103 have both proved that in spades in red vs. blue training. I also think that the USAF is in a bit of a "what do we do now?" mindframe. They've got this ultra-expensive new toy, which they "claim" is for "kicking down the door" for advance operations during a conflict. The problem is they desperately need to prove this capability sometime soon in something other than a simulated conflict. Lots of people on capitol hill are looking around and scratching their heads trying to figure out which side of the fence is the best one to be on in this issue.

Edited May 2, 2006 by Skull Leader

[Shin Densetsu Kai 7.0]

Is there any more to the f/a-18f vs f22 kill story. all i read is snippits of picture caption. and is it really f-18f or the aggressor squadron of f-18s

It was a VFA-11 Red Rippers F/A-18F flown by a former tomcat crew who were in VF-11 and transitioned. The aggressors(VFC-12) have F/A-18Cs. BTW I hear some raptor pilots are pissed the gun camera footage was released.

395876[/snapback]

That's no lie. On another site that David and I frequent, a Raptor driver went as far as to have the thread cited as a "security concern" in order to get thread shut down by the moderators. He's not too happy it showed up and the rest of the board hasn't stopped laughing at him since. Meanwhile the Navy is having a field day distributing those photos (a guy I know in VFA-103 who claims there is much more where that came from)

I'm gonna go on a limb and speculate here, it's just an opinion and personal observation.

The reason "Waco" was so quick to try and get that picture yanked is because right now the USAF is banking on the F-22A's "invincible" image being untarnished so they can continue to push for more airframes, and any sign of weakness is immediately pounced upon by the "have-nots".

Don't get me wrong, I like the F-22 (and yes it is more than capable of performing a cobra/culbit). It's a great and capable fighter to replace the USAF's aging F-15 fleet (if the Tomcat community had to deal with change, can the Eagle community be far behind?)... but just like every other jet out there, it isn't perfect. VFA-11 and VFA-103 have both proved that in spades in red vs. blue training. I also think that the USAF is in a bit of a "what do we do now?" mindframe. They've got this ultra-expensive new toy, which they "claim" is for "kicking down the door" for advance operations during a conflict. The problem is they desperately need to prove this capability sometime soon in something other than a simulated conflict. Lots of people on capitol hill are looking around and scratching their heads trying to figure out which side of the fence is the best one to be on in this issue.

396052[/snapback]

Wow Waco is being laughed at?

Me, I don't see anything wrong with the pics at all, hell who the heck knows,maybe the raptor pilot who was nabbed by the super bug crew was new to the plane or having a bad day. The crew in the super bug was an experienced crew, this once again proves, its the pilot, not the plane. Under ideal circumstances and with a highly experienced pilot though, I'm sure the raptor is one hell of a beast to mess with. Only thing I wonder is why the raptor pilot let the bug get so close and didn't just duck under, split-S and use speed to seperate.

And for just this one mock kill theres dozens of mock kills that the raptor's got on other planes as well.

I wonder though, does the MKI definitely have an edge over the raptor close in...

[Phalanx]

  The crew in the super bug was an experienced crew, this once again proves, its the pilot, not the plane.  Under ideal circumstances and with a highly experienced pilot though, I'm sure the raptor is one hell of a beast to mess with.  Only thing I wonder is why the raptor pilot let the bug get so close and didn't just duck under, split-S and use speed to seperate. 

396067[/snapback]

So I guess I was right about the F-22 pilot getting his assed own in a simulated dogfight by the "Horny Horn" (my personal pun for this skybird). Well actually, sort of, as I assumed in the other thread that the pilot was getting careless in action when it turns out the pilot was seemingly inexperienced. But I still do find that pic rather hilarious IMHO to see a Raptor lose to a Hornet.

Also, someone stated that do people get into actual dogfights these day and that made me think more about that question as I answered no because like I said before, I haven't heard any personal accounts of USAF aces shooting down any enemy aircraft since the hey day of the war in Iraq. At this rate, the U.S might as well start optimizing all of their next gen fighters to have A2G capabilities since most of the time you hear them completing strafing runs and bombing runs on ground targets.

[Skull Leader]

At this rate, the U.S might as well start optimizing all of their next gen fighters to have A2G capabilities since most of the time you hear them completing strafing runs and bombing runs on ground targets.

396109[/snapback]

Most of them already do.

[buddhafabio]

Getting stuck for 5 hours inside one of the most technologically-advanced fighter in the world.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles/2006/...ter+canopy.html

395961[/snapback]

that probably was cheapest way to get pilot out. the other i would imagine would involve the aces 2 seat

Edited May 3, 2006 by buddhafabio

[Lynx7725]

Man, the F-22 ain't having a good week, is it?

[Warmaker]

Man, the F-22 ain't having a good week, is it?

396153[/snapback]

Firstly, kudos to the Super Bug aircrew! The SHornet isn't exactly a great dogfighter, which makes this even better.

As for the F-22 not having a good week? All aircraft, all aircrew, from any Naval / Air Forces around the world with lots of flight hours will have bad moments or bad time periods. There's tons of military aircraft mishaps that civillians don't know about.

I know the USAF pilots probably weren't too keen on losing this fight, esp with pics being put out on the 'net. But I'd rather see them get "schooled" by very well trained friendlies on a training exercise than in a future real world situation.

Edited May 3, 2006 by Warmaker

[Lynx7725]

Man, the F-22 ain't having a good week, is it?

396153[/snapback]

As for the F-22 not having a good week? All aircraft, all aircrew, from any Naval / Air Forces around the world with lots of flight hours will have bad moments or bad time periods. There's tons of military aircraft mishaps that civillians don't know about.

396160[/snapback]

Probably. Personally, I see it more as an result of a (probably) good (and expensive) aircraft in a global climate that is making the aircraft's role increasingly irrelevant.

Think about it a bit. In terms of air superiority, very few country actually can match the quality, quantity and technical expertise of the USAF/ USN. Of the few that can match it, they often don't have the economic potential to maintain a war footing as long as the US can. Even in terms of potential threat, very few exists currently. The odds of actually needing the F-22's capabilities are actually fairly low IMO.*

With that kind of cost sensitivity and general public sentiments, incidents like what happened would draw a larger than warranted flak from the public. Heck, IIRC, A4s from the Top Gun program routinely rubs F-14 and F-18 pilots' noses into the ground, don't they? You don't hear comments on those.

Not to mention the F-22 backers would of course be nervous. It's big money in an environment where the budget keeps shrinking. So they would also overreact to small incidents, making them a bigger incident. Classic example: The F-22 pilot's attempt to pull the footage. Heck, just admit the F-22 got dusted and get even next time up.

* Note that while I acknowledge the possibilities are low, I still believe development of next-generation technologies is still critical. In terms of aircraft development I feel the F-22 is an important aircraft. I'm just not sure how useful it is, really.

[David Hingtgen]

Based on what I've read, like most "unexpected" gun kill pics, the F-22 probably started out at a severe disadvantage for the sole purpose of seeing how a Super Hornet does at knife-range against a super-agile fighter.

In other words, in a "real" scenario, the F-22 would have had a 99.9% chance of shooting the Super Hornet down before the Super Hornet even knew the F-22 was there. That is the F-22's main way to fight---basically a long-range assassin. I think in like 1 of 100 encounters could an F-15 even get close enough to actually dogfight with an F-22, the other 99 times it was shot down before it even knew the F-22 was there.

Thus, the Super Hornet was probably intentionally allowed to find the F-22 first, at close range, and then see if it could manuever with it to get a gun kill. Or something along those lines.

I can't imagine it was a fair "start 50 miles apart, and see who kills who first"

I would guess the Super Hornet is the best US plane after the F-22 at knife range, and may even have superior high-alpha and nose-pointing ability (they have a 10G over-ride if they need it). However, no plane would ever have the chance to get in close to an F-22 in the first place---unless you've set it up that way solely for training.

[Nied]

I always felt that pic said more about the Super Hornet's dog fighting skills than it did about the F-22's. By the way it's talked about on the internet you'd think that taking a pic like that would be impossible for the "SuperSlow/Sewer/Sh*tty Hornet," but there it is with a Raptor in it's gunsights with the pilot's finger on the trigger. Not bad for what everyone thought was the slow fat kid.

Edited May 3, 2006 by Nied

[Warmaker]

Well, the SHornet better be good and we'll also see over time. It's supposed to fulfill the duties of several big name aircraft. We'll see...

[David Hingtgen]

Current discussion on ARC is "What is the Shornet's top speed".

Conflicting info from pretty good sources, including .9, 1.3, and 1.6. And we're talking airshow-clean configuration.

PS---I've always thought the Super Hornet would rock in a dogfight. But it's still ugly and slow compared to a Tomcat.

[Skull Leader]

Based on what I've read, like most "unexpected" gun kill pics, the F-22 probably started out at a severe disadvantage for the sole purpose of seeing how a Super Hornet does at knife-range against a super-agile fighter. 

In other words, in a "real" scenario, the F-22 would have had a 99.9% chance of shooting the Super Hornet down before the Super Hornet even knew the F-22 was there.  That is the F-22's main way to fight---basically a long-range assassin.  I think in like 1 of 100 encounters could an F-15 even get close enough to actually dogfight with an F-22, the other 99 times it was shot down before it even knew the F-22 was there.

Thus, the Super Hornet was probably intentionally allowed to find the F-22 first, at close range, and then see if it could manuever with it to get a gun kill.  Or something along those lines.

I can't imagine it was a fair "start 50 miles apart, and see who kills who first"

I would guess the Super Hornet is the best US plane after the F-22 at knife range, and may even have superior high-alpha and nose-pointing ability (they have a 10G over-ride if they need it).  However, no plane would ever have the chance to get in close to an F-22 in the first place---unless you've set it up that way solely for training.

396170[/snapback]

"Mango" did say that any time the "fight's on!" call was given and the Raptor was still BVR, it won almost every time. It wasn't until the aircraft were in sight of one another that the Super Hornet began to bite back.

[Warmaker]

Current discussion on ARC is "What is the Shornet's top speed". 

Conflicting info from pretty good sources, including .9, 1.3, and 1.6.  And we're talking airshow-clean configuration. 

PS---I've always thought the Super Hornet would rock in a dogfight.  But it's still ugly and slow compared to a Tomcat. 

396182[/snapback]

As for looks go, I still class the regular Hornet higher than the Super E/F/G. Though of course I'm biased a tad bit. I work on Hornet A/B/C/Ds (well, D's only these days).

But the most beautiful US jet in my eyes is still the F-14. I've built many models of that jet and drew it tons of times.

The regular Hornet and F-15 are tied at 2nd place.

[Warmaker]

  Also, someone stated that do people get into actual dogfights these day and that made me think more about that question as I answered no because like I said before, I haven't heard any  personal accounts of USAF aces shooting down any enemy aircraft since the hey day of the war in Iraq. At this rate, the U.S might as well start optimizing all of their next gen fighters to have A2G capabilities since most of the time you hear them completing strafing runs and bombing runs on ground targets.

396109[/snapback]

I haven't heard of any bonafide air to air combat in a while.

OIF? Wasn't much of that since the Iraqi Air Force never really recovered from Desert Shield / Storm. They also never even tried to contest the air with any serious attempts.

Even in Desert Shield / Storm, they didn't try that hard to contest the skies with their aircraft. The Coalition air forces simply were too good and overpowering. Anytime they tried to come up, they got swatted down real hard, and usually at BVR.

The US military had been allowing as many of its tactical aircraft to be able to go air to ground for a while now. The F-15E had been doing that for a while. The F-14D also from the 90s. The F-16 and F/A-18 have played this ball game for a long time also. Of all these fighters though, the F-14 joined the party late. I think they got themselves in a bad situation by being too focused in only fleet air defense. When conflicts of late have shown little air resistance, it kind of puts the focus of priority on the commands that could perform strike sorties.

[Loner]

Lots of people on capitol hill are looking around and scratching their heads trying to figure out which side of the fence is the best one to be on in this issue.

396052[/snapback]

Super Tomcat 21!

[Skull Leader]

Lots of people on capitol hill are looking around and scratching their heads trying to figure out which side of the fence is the best one to be on in this issue.

396052[/snapback]

Super Tomcat 21!

396203[/snapback]

a little late to THAT party, I'm afraid. The sad thing is that even if the thing had gone to production and the Super Hornet was the one that never made it past the wooden mockup phase, you'd be hearing the same gripes, just change the people doing the whining.

[Phalanx]

Current discussion on ARC is "What is the Shornet's top speed". 

Conflicting info from pretty good sources, including .9, 1.3, and 1.6.   And we're talking airshow-clean configuration.  

PS---I've always thought the Super Hornet would rock in a dogfight.  But it's still ugly and slow compared to a Tomcat. 

396182[/snapback]

As for looks go, I still class the regular Hornet higher than the Super E/F/G. Though of course I'm biased a tad bit. I work on Hornet A/B/C/Ds (well, D's only these days).

But the most beautiful US jet in my eyes is still the F-14. I've built many models of that jet and drew it tons of times.

The regular Hornet and F-15 are tied at 2nd place.

396186[/snapback]

Yeah Warmaker, the F-14 will always be my favorite U.S fighter now til the day I die. I like the Tomcat 21 even better. I too have drawn pics of this remarkable fighter throughout my life and I've designed my own F-14 look alike aircraft that were heavily influenced by this bad boy. The F-15 is my 2nd favorite too and the Hornet is my 3rd. I went on to loving the F-15 temporarily after the F-14 after I took a picture of me in the cockpit of one at 1997 air show at Andrews AFB. I also rember 12 years ago when I was 7, I built a Tomcat model (snap together actually) and an F-15 model (snap together as well). I temporarily alternate back and forward between my favorite fighters.

Also guys, you wanna know a very interesting typo in the speed of the Hornet? Well, for some of you guys, you may or may not have noticed it and I don't know if somebody pointed this out in the first thread but remember that one part in the movie Independence Day were Will Smith and his partner Jimmy had to outrun those 2 alien attackers in their F/A-18's by flying over Imperial Valley desert? During that scene, they briefly showed the MFD of Will's Hornet and his digital speedometer shows his fighter pushing Mach 3.5. Now we all know that an Hornet can't do Mach 3.5 even though it would be nice. It's also worth noting that I first fell in love with the Hornet after seeing them in action in this awesome blockbuster.