[QUOTE=SENS;
Please send the related graphic before doing such claim.
Maneuverability data is difficult to obtain. You get some from flight manuals, of which many can be downloaded on file share. Western aircraft are easier to get than Eastern, as many things are published. I don’t know of a book that put fighters next to each other, also because people familiar with flight performance and aerial combat know how pointless such comparisons are. The key advantages of an aircraft in en engagement can normally much better be explained using plain language, in case of the F-4 versus MiG-21 it is the better low speed performance of the -21, with the Phantom having the upper hand at higher airspeeds and Mach numbers.
MiG-19 versus F-100: Both ugly, both difficult to fly. Theoretical performance is one thing, the ability to exploit this in a tactical situation is another.
Here is the graph..[Sens] Max speed is universally assumed as one where acceleration left is less than 0.03 g i.e. where a/c takes almost “infinite” time to accelerate further.
[Schorch] You gave a good comment, it is difficult to put fighters next to each other and compare. I must admit that I also saw these fighter data only in that book about F-4/MiG-21 and you will forgive me, I read somewhat different than you said. I think I read that MiG-21 is better above Mach 1.4 and at subsonic speeds there is a mixed situation, how aircraft is flown – to which limits and what models are in question.
It is true these data are usually classified but intelligence may be exaggerating with these. What about sustained turns of F-100? Aircraft is more than 50 years old. Does anybody can share data?
On the other hand, MiG-29 was 5 years in service in dozen countries and our intelligence was not aware of it’s helmet cued missiles.
Sign In
