Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-25-2015, 06:29 PM
 
Location: New Orleans, LA
1,809 posts, read 5,387,112 times
Reputation: 698

Advertisements

https://m.youtube.com/results?q=f35%20vs%20f18&sm=1
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-26-2015, 02:31 PM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 59,556,521 times
Reputation: 24857
The F-35 is the clear winner as it cost several times as much as an already built F-18. The F-35 provides far more employment to the people that build it and much greater profit to the war mongers that own the factory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-26-2015, 03:25 PM
 
Location: SW OK (AZ Native)
24,185 posts, read 13,039,082 times
Reputation: 10543
Interesting how all commentary is by a Boeing engineer. Like having a GM engineer comment about how the Silverado is better than the F-150... no bias there, eh? Having flown against very low observable aircraft (F-117, F-22) and moderately stealthy aircraft (F-16, F/A-18) there is a MEASURABLE (emphasis) difference in radar detection capabilities.

It's interesting to see so many naysayers, both those with a financial agenda (Boeing, Northrop-Grumman, Aerospatiale) and those with a political agenda (mostly contributors to these forums), but it's nothing surprising. In 1975 there were a lot of people, both in and out of the defense business, who were very down on two upcoming weapons systems: The A-10 and the F-16. "It's too slow!", "It's ugly!", "It has straight wings!", "What, no afterburner and no radar? WTF?". And what's the A-10's combat record, besides enviable? "It's a toy!", "It won't carry enough bombs!", "One engine!", "It'll do only one mission...". The F-16 was the workhorse of OEF and OIF, is more fuel-efficient than anything from Mc-Boeing or N-G or the Europeans, the best use of four P&W F-100 or F-110 engines is a four-ship of F-16s wall-to-wall with GBUs, and along with the B-52 is about the best bang-for-the-buck aircraft ever built for the US military.

Until the F-35 is fully evaluated in multi-national exercises and combat training scenarios (or even the real thing) it's not valid to dismiss it on the basis of some tactically unrealistic WVR setups. Yeah, it does cost too much, but has anyone priced a new pickup truck these days?

Of course, even the F-4 had its bitter detractors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2015, 09:45 PM
 
725 posts, read 800,328 times
Reputation: 1697
The F-18 is a good plane that serves its limited role well.

The F-35 is an ok plane which is forced to take on practically every (non cargo/tanker) fixed wing role for the Navy, Marines and Air Force. As I said it is an ok plane. It's performance pales in comparison to the F-15, F-16 and the retired F-14. It will be sub par to all 3 in dog fights, offers not that much of an advantage in terms of missile and bombing capability and doesn't offer any significant speed or range gain. Its stealth qualities are over rated with the new radar technology and having 1 engine instead of two is a concern.

It is a trillion dollar waste. It is funny how the U.S. peaked in aerospace technology and mechanical engineering in the 60's/70's with the 747, F-14, Apollo program and Concorde. Why build an entirely new airplane from scratch and force it on the 3 branches that fly fixed wing when it doesn't match up to 40 year old designs in terms of capability.

I'd say the military should have stuck with the F-14, F-16 and F-15 designs and made some modifications, use new composite technology, try to reduce weight and increase range and all that stuff.

The F-22 at least is a great fighter aside from the oxygen problems. Though the F-22 is a huge waste of money as it is not cost effective to build a plane that costs over 100 million each.

Thankfully there isn't a foreigner fighter that matches up to the capability of even the F-35. Wars are not going to be lost or won with these airplanes. That is a thing of the past.

Just a huge waste of money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-28-2015, 10:31 PM
 
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
11,223 posts, read 16,351,012 times
Reputation: 13536
Quote:
Originally Posted by john620 View Post
The F-18 is a good plane that serves its limited role well.
Huh? F-18.......limited role?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2015, 03:28 AM
 
725 posts, read 800,328 times
Reputation: 1697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnatomicflux View Post
Huh? F-18.......limited role?

It's a good fighter and can do recon and precision bombing but its range is limited as is its speed. It's a solid airplane. Now the F-14, that was a plane.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2015, 04:59 AM
 
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
11,223 posts, read 16,351,012 times
Reputation: 13536
True enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2015, 06:09 AM
 
Location: About 10 miles north of Pittsburgh International
2,458 posts, read 4,186,318 times
Reputation: 2374
Quote:

It is funny how the U.S. peaked in aerospace technology and mechanical
engineering in the 60's/70's with the 747, F-14, Apollo program and
Concorde.
Well, you got 3 out of 4...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2015, 09:09 AM
 
Location: SW OK (AZ Native)
24,185 posts, read 13,039,082 times
Reputation: 10543
Quote:
Originally Posted by john620 View Post
It's a good fighter and can do recon and precision bombing but its range is limited as is its speed. It's a solid airplane. Now the F-14, that was a plane.
In a classic dogfight, an F-18 chews up an F-14. I have flown against F-14s and have trained students who were transitioning from Navy F-14s to F-16s, either as Navy aggressors or as separated Navy pilots going to the Guard or Reserve. They regarded the F-14 as a one-trick pony. Could go fast, and carry the Phoenix missile, but not very maneuverable, despite what the movie "Top Gun" showed. Late in its life the F-14 got bombing capability, aka "The Bombcat", but it wasn't as useful as a Hornet.

The single engine argument has been going on for decades, and has no merit. The twin-engine "mafia" has stated that "two engines are always better than one". Safety records tend to disprove this. Yes, it can be disconcerting to have just one engine while flying a trans-oceanic deployment mission, and the radar does a self-test (it makes a rumble and a "thunk"), or while flying over Fallujah at 2 AM, because the engine is at a power setting that sets up a minor harmonic there's a sudden rumble... that does get your attention. However, look at the history of single-engine fighters: ME-109, FW-190, Spitfire, Hurricane, P-47, P-51, Zero, and pretty much every WWII Navy carrier aircraft. From Korea, the F-86 and MiG-15. The Century Series of US fighters, including the F-100 and F-105, as well as the A-4, A-7, and the last gunfighter, the F-8. The F-16 and the AV-8 Harrier. I could explain the design compromises in detail, but won't because it could take a dozen paragraphs.

Last edited by SluggoF16; 10-29-2015 at 09:33 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2015, 05:21 PM
 
Location: Eastern Washington
17,120 posts, read 56,763,506 times
Reputation: 18396
In fairness to the F-14's designers, I think "go fast" and "carry Phoenix" along with "carrier qualified" were about all they were trying to do, no? Any ability to do an air-to-air dogfight was just gravy.

In general small vehicles are more maneuverable than big ones, regardless if they roll, float, or fly. At least in my experience with ones that roll.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Aviation

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top